While many GPs are currently involved in some aspects of cancer management, with training, good communication and support from specialists this role may be successfully expanded.
While many GPs are currently involved in some aspects of cancer management, detailed and timely communication between specialists and GPs is imperative to support shared care and ensure optimal patient outcomes. This research highlights the need for established channels of communication between specialist and primary care medicine to support greater involvement by GPs in cancer care.
Objective: Our study sought to ascertain women's beliefs about breast cancer risk factors and whether these beliefs differed by demographic factors and personal and family history of breast cancer.Methods: Participants in a case-control study of breast cancer rated the effect of 37 exposures on the risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer. Chi-square tests were undertaken to measure differences in responses between cases and controls for each exposure. Logistic regression was undertaken to ascertain whether demographic factors and personal and family history of breast cancer affected participants' ability to correctly identify known breast cancer risk factors.Results: A total of 2742 participants completed the questionnaire, comprising 1109 cases and 1633 controls. Significant differences (p < 0.05) between cases and controls were found for 16 of the 37 exposures. Younger women and university-educated women were more likely to correctly identify known breast cancer risk factors. Women's perceptions about the effect of alcohol consumption on breast cancer risk, particularly regarding red wine, differed from that reported in the literature.Conclusions: Beliefs about risk factors for breast cancer may differ between cases and controls. Public health initiatives aimed at increasing awareness of breast cancer risk factors should consider that women's beliefs may differ by demographic factors and family history of breast cancer.
Issue addressed
Up to one‐third of incident cancers in Australia are attributable to modifiable factors. Understanding the general public's awareness of cancer risk and protective factors is important for identifying knowledge gaps and informing the development of effective and targeted health promotion strategies.
Methods
In a telephonic survey of 355 Western Australian adults aged 18‐54 years (48% male), with a sample skewed towards low‐socio‐economic status areas, respondents rated the effect on cancer risk of 11 established cancer risk factors and seven established cancer protective factors.
Results
Most respondents correctly recognised the increased cancer risk from sun tanning (94%), asbestos (92%), pesticide use (92%) and being overweight or obese (86%), and the protective effect of being physically active (82%). Half (52%) of respondents incorrectly believed that red wine decreased or had no effect on cancer risk. One in five respondents (19%) incorrectly believed that sunscreen use increased cancer risk. Only 18% of respondents were aware that human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination confers a protective effect, while 17% believed it increases risk.
Conclusions
Although the majority of respondents were aware of certain established cancer risk and protective factors, a sizeable proportion held misconceptions about the cancer risk associated with red wine consumption, sunscreen use and HPV vaccination.
So what?
Health promotion programs designed to educate the public about modifiable cancer risk factors may need to increase public awareness of the safety of preventive factors such as HPV vaccination and sunscreen, and the increased cancer risk from consumption of all alcoholic beverage types, including red wine.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.