From “reducing” to “coping with” uncertainty: reconceptualizing the central challenge in breast self-exams

Babrow, Austin S.; Kline, Kimberly N.

doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00112-x

Cited by 120 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

104

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Following the disclosure of the uncertainty about evidence, some patients may ignore the positive evidence about BSEs and decide not to perform BSEs. 84 Communicating uncertainty may also prompt different information-seeking behaviors. Some patients may respond to uncertainty by actively seeking information.…”

Section: à58mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Optimism can encourage patients to accept treatments and maintain an active response to their illness if they perceive great potential benefits. 84 However, false hopes about treatments can lead some patients to ignore real risks of other lifestyle behaviors. For instance, diabetic patients who believe that insulin alone can control blood sugar levels might not additionally alter their dietary habits.…”

Section: Emotional Outcomes Of Communicating Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. There is growing interest in shared medical decision making among patients, physicians, and policy makers. This requires patients to interpret increasing amounts of medical information, much of which is uncertain. Little is known about the optimal approaches to or outcomes of communicating uncertainty about the risks and benefits of treatments. Methods. The authors reviewed the literature on various issues related to uncertainty in decision making: conceptualizing uncertainty, identifying its potential sources, assessing uncertainty, potential methods of communicating uncertainty, potential outcomes of communicating uncertainty, and current practices and recommendations by expert groups on communicating uncertainty. Results. There are multiple sources of uncertainty in most medical decisions. There are conceptual differences in how researchers define uncertainty and its sources, as well as in its measurement. The few studies that have assessed alternate means of communicating uncertainty dealt mostly with presenting uncertainty about probabilities. Both patients' and physicians' interpretation of and responses to uncertainty may depend on their personal characteristics and values and may be affected by the manner in which uncertainty is communicated. Conclusions. Research has not yet identified best practices for communicating uncertainty to patients about harms and benefits of treatment. More conceptual, qualitative, and quantitative studies are needed to explore fundamental questions about how people process, interpret, and respond to various types of uncertainty inherent in clinical decisions.

show abstract

Section: à58mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Emotional Outcomes Of Communicating Uncertaintymentioning

confidence: 99%

Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is done towards achieving a shared consciousness of uncertainty which has been referred to as a 'shared mind' for managing the uncertainties of treatment (Epstein and Peters 2009). While information-sharing has alone been proven to be effective in decision-making for uncertainty management interventions in healthcare (Nelson et al 2007), in the context of irreducible uncertainty, where there is no known knowledge gap, the capacity for such uncertainty to be seen as a source of possibility or hope should not be dismissed (Babrow and Kline 2000). While risk-sentience is an inborn skill, it is theorized that it can be artificially harnessed and heightened by a continual process involving sharing of uncertainties, other's mistakes, experiences (personal and others), and anecdotal reporting of related information.…”

Section: The Theory Of Risk-sentience (Tors)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and Introduction of the Risk-Sentience Auxiliary Framework (RSAF) as an Enabler to the ISO 31000 and ISO 31010 for High-Risk Environments

Selvaseelan¹

2018

Administrative Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The aim of this study was to develop, implement, and evaluate a new auxiliary enterprise risk management framework and process to serve as an enabler to the global ISO 31000 risk framework and ISO 31010 processes. This framework has been designed particularly for use within high-risk environments and those characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA). This paper proposes a methodology for optimization of structured sharing and grass-roots management of all available risk-sentience information with the assessed potential to develop into an identifiable risk in the future. The author introduces new risk terminology including risk-sentience, risk-sentience information, and risk-sentience management. The process involved the development of the Theory of Risk-Sentience (ToRS), Risk-Sentience Auxiliary Framework (RSAF) and a risk-sentience management process referred to as LUOMEAR (Learning from Uncertainties, Others Mistakes, Experiences and Anecdotal Reporting). Manchester Patient Safety Framework (MaPSaF), SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis, and a newly developed Risk-Sentience Fertility Checklist were used to conduct pre and post-trial evaluations. The findings include positive adjustments in safety culture, components of commitment to quality, communication and team-working around safety issues, access to evolving risk-information, and efficient sharing and management of recorded risk-information. Recommendations are made for more extensive application of both the proposed auxiliary risk framework and process within high-risk sectors to further explore its effectiveness and scope.

show abstract

“…The sociological literature around women's attitudes to breast screening has often focused on reasons for non-compliance, with the goal of improving women's adherence to advice about mammography screening and breast awareness (Kearney, 2006;Babrow and Kline, 2000). While we know how many women attend for mammography, little is known about why women accept or reject the invitation (Pfeffer, 2004b).…”

Section: Donna 2009)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Screening for breast cancer: Medicalization, visualization and the embodied experience

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Women's perspectives on breast screening (mammography and breast awareness)were explored in interviews with midlife women sampled for diversity of background and health experience. Attending mammography screening was considered a social obligation despite women's fears and experiences of discomfort. Women gave considerable legitimacy to mammography visualisations of the breast, and the expert interpretation of these. In comparison, women lack confidence in breast awareness practices, directly comparing their sensory capabilities with those of the mammogram, although mammography screening does not substitute breast awareness in a straight forward way. The authors argue that reliance on visualising technology may create a fragmented sense of the body, separating the at risk breast from embodied experience.

show abstract

From “reducing” to “coping with” uncertainty: reconceptualizing the central challenge in breast self-exams

Cited by 120 publications

References 32 publications

Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions

Communicating the Uncertainty of Harms and Benefits of Medical Interventions

Development and Introduction of the Risk-Sentience Auxiliary Framework (RSAF) as an Enabler to the ISO 31000 and ISO 31010 for High-Risk Environments

Screening for breast cancer: Medicalization, visualization and the embodied experience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About