English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Although a key function of cancer genetics services is to provide risk information, to date there has been little consistency in the way in which breast cancer risk perception has been measured. The aims of the study were to measure estimates of (i) population risk, (ii) absolute risk and (iii) comparative risk of developing breast cancer for Ashkenazi Jewish women, and to determine predictors of breast cancer risk perception. Of 152 women, 107 (70%) completed all questions. The mean (s.d.) estimates for population risk, absolute risk and comparative risk were 22.7% (15.9), 31.8% (20.6) and 1.9-fold (1.9), respectively. Most women overestimated population risk. Women at population risk generally overestimated the population risk and their own absolute risk, yet understood they are at the same risk as the population. Those with a family history understood that they are at increased risk, but underestimated the extent to which their familial risk is increased. Anxiety, high estimation of population risk and lesser family history predicted overestimation of absolute risk, whereas high estimation of population risk and a strong family history predicted underestimation of comparative risk.

british journal of cancer

Measuring, and identifying predictors of, women's perceptions of three types of breast cancer risk: population risk, absolute risk and comparative risk