• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

设想在乳腺癌筛查项目中实施个性化方法:利益相关者的观点。

Envisioning Implementation of a Personalized Approach in Breast Cancer Screening Programs: Stakeholder Perspectives.

作者信息

Esquivel-Sada Daphne, Lévesque Emmanuelle, Hagan Julie, Knoppers Bartha Maria, Simard Jacques

机构信息

Sociologist, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC.

Lawyer and Academic Associate, Centre of Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC.

出版信息

Healthc Policy. 2019 Nov;15(2):39-54. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2019.26072.

DOI:10.12927/hcpol.2019.26072
PMID:32077844
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7020798/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Advances in genomics and epidemiology can foster the implementation of a risk-based approach to current age-based breast cancer screening programs. This personalized approach would challenge the trajectory for women in the healthcare system by adding both a risk-assessment step (including a genomic test) and screening options.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to explore, from an organizational perspective, the acceptability of different proposals for each step of the trajectory for women in the healthcare system should a personalized approach be implemented in the province of Quebec.

METHODS

We interviewed 20 professional stakeholders who are either involved in the current breast cancer screening program in Quebec or who are likely to play a role in the future implementation of a personalized risk-based approach.

RESULTS|DISCUSSION: Preferences are split between proposals supporting self-management by the women themselves (e.g., solicitation through media campaign, self-collection of information and sample and results provided by letter) and proposals prioritizing more interaction between women and healthcare providers (e.g., solicitation by health professionals, collection of information and samples by a nurse and results provided by health professionals).

摘要

背景

基因组学和流行病学的进展有助于在当前基于年龄的乳腺癌筛查项目中实施基于风险的方法。这种个性化方法将通过增加风险评估步骤(包括基因检测)和筛查选项,对医疗保健系统中女性的就医流程提出挑战。

目的

本研究的目的是从组织角度探讨,若在魁北克省实施个性化方法,医疗保健系统中女性就医流程各步骤的不同提议的可接受性。

方法

我们采访了20名专业利益相关者,他们要么参与了魁北克当前的乳腺癌筛查项目,要么可能在未来基于风险的个性化方法实施中发挥作用。

结果|讨论:在支持女性自我管理的提议(例如通过媒体宣传进行招募、自我收集信息以及通过信件提供样本和结果)和优先考虑女性与医疗保健提供者之间更多互动的提议(例如由医疗专业人员进行招募、由护士收集信息和样本以及由医疗专业人员提供结果)之间,存在不同偏好。

相似文献

1
Envisioning Implementation of a Personalized Approach in Breast Cancer Screening Programs: Stakeholder Perspectives.设想在乳腺癌筛查项目中实施个性化方法:利益相关者的观点。
Healthc Policy. 2019 Nov;15(2):39-54. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2019.26072.
2
Views of health professionals on risk-based breast cancer screening and its implementation in the Spanish National Health System: A qualitative discussion group study.卫生专业人员对基于风险的乳腺癌筛查及其在西班牙国家卫生系统中的实施的看法:定性讨论组研究。
PLoS One. 2022 Feb 4;17(2):e0263788. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0263788. eCollection 2022.
3
[Influence of organizational factors on implementation of a personalized approach to breast cancer screening].[组织因素对实施乳腺癌个性化筛查方法的影响]
Sante Publique. 2016 May-Jun;28(3):353-61.
4
Breast cancer screening in an era of personalized regimens: a conceptual model and National Cancer Institute initiative for risk-based and preference-based approaches at a population level.个体化治疗时代的乳腺癌筛查:基于风险和偏好的人群水平策略的概念模型和美国国家癌症研究所倡议。
Cancer. 2014 Oct 1;120(19):2955-64. doi: 10.1002/cncr.28771. Epub 2014 May 15.
5
Knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to breast cancer screening among female health care professionals: a cross sectional study.女性医护专业人员乳腺癌筛查相关的知识、态度和实践:一项横断面研究。
BMC Womens Health. 2019 Oct 22;19(1):122. doi: 10.1186/s12905-019-0819-x.
6
The limits of personalization in precision medicine: Polygenic risk scores and racial categorization in a precision breast cancer screening trial.精准医学中的个体化限制:精准乳腺癌筛查试验中的多基因风险评分和种族分类。
PLoS One. 2021 Oct 29;16(10):e0258571. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258571. eCollection 2021.
7
The feasibility of implementing risk stratification into a national breast cancer screening programme: a focus group study investigating the perspectives of healthcare personnel responsible for delivery.实施风险分层筛查纳入国家乳腺癌筛查计划的可行性:一项针对负责实施人员的观点的焦点小组研究。
BMC Womens Health. 2022 May 2;22(1):142. doi: 10.1186/s12905-022-01730-0.
8
Are we ready for the challenge of implementing risk-based breast cancer screening and primary prevention?我们是否已准备好迎接基于风险的乳腺癌筛查和一级预防的挑战?
Breast. 2018 Jun;39:24-32. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.02.029. Epub 2018 Mar 10.
9
Cost-Effectiveness of Personalized Screening for Colorectal Cancer Based on Polygenic Risk and Family History.基于多基因风险和家族史的大肠癌个体化筛查的成本效益分析。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Jan;29(1):10-21. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-18-1123. Epub 2019 Nov 20.
10
Patient, primary care provider, and stakeholder perspectives on mammography screening frequency: lessons learned from a qualitative study.患者、初级保健提供者和利益相关者对乳房 X 光筛查频率的看法:来自定性研究的经验教训。
BMC Cancer. 2022 Jul 27;22(1):819. doi: 10.1186/s12885-022-09900-x.

引用本文的文献

1
Key stakeholders' perspectives on implementation of risk-based population breast cancer screening in Australia - "We can either get on the bus or get under it".澳大利亚关键利益相关者对实施基于风险的人群乳腺癌筛查的看法——“我们要么上车,要么被车碾过” 。
Arch Public Health. 2025 Sep 1;83(1):223. doi: 10.1186/s13690-025-01690-5.
2
Primary care providers' experience and satisfaction with personalised breast cancer screening risk communication: a descriptive cross-sectional study.初级保健提供者对个性化乳腺癌筛查风险沟通的体验与满意度:一项描述性横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2025 May 2;15(5):e093936. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093936.
3

本文引用的文献

1
BOADICEA: a comprehensive breast cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and nongenetic risk factors.BOADICEA:一种综合乳腺癌风险预测模型,纳入了遗传和非遗传风险因素。
Genet Med. 2019 Aug;21(8):1708-1718. doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0406-9. Epub 2019 Jan 15.
2
Polygenic Risk Scores for Prediction of Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Subtypes.多基因风险评分在乳腺癌及乳腺癌亚型预测中的应用。
Am J Hum Genet. 2019 Jan 3;104(1):21-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.002. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
3
Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in women aged 40-74 years who are not at increased risk for breast cancer.
Barriers and Facilitators to Delivering Multifactorial Risk Assessment and Communication for Personalized Breast Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study Exploring Implementation in Canada.
开展个性化乳腺癌筛查多因素风险评估与沟通的障碍及促进因素:一项探索加拿大实施情况的定性研究
Curr Oncol. 2025 Mar 10;32(3):155. doi: 10.3390/curroncol32030155.
4
Leading the way in pediatric sexual health screenings: evaluating pediatric emergency department workflows for the integration of STI screening tools.引领儿科性健康筛查之路:评估儿科急诊科整合性传播感染筛查工具的工作流程。
Front Health Serv. 2025 Mar 3;5:1493318. doi: 10.3389/frhs.2025.1493318. eCollection 2025.
5
Navigating the risks: Stakeholder views on risk-based cervical cancer screening.应对风险:利益相关者对基于风险的宫颈癌筛查的看法。
PLoS One. 2025 Mar 5;20(3):e0317986. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317986. eCollection 2025.
6
"For and against" factors influencing participation in personalized breast cancer screening programs: a qualitative systematic review until March 2022.影响参与个性化乳腺癌筛查项目的“支持与反对”因素:截至2022年3月的定性系统评价
Arch Public Health. 2024 Feb 22;82(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13690-024-01248-x.
7
Implementation considerations for risk-tailored cancer screening in the population: A scoping review.风险定制癌症筛查在人群中的实施考虑因素:范围综述。
Prev Med. 2024 Apr;181:107897. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.107897. Epub 2024 Feb 18.
8
Canadian Healthcare Professionals' Views and Attitudes toward Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening.加拿大医疗保健专业人员对风险分层乳腺癌筛查的看法和态度。
J Pers Med. 2023 Jun 21;13(7):1027. doi: 10.3390/jpm13071027.
9
Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening Incorporating a Polygenic Risk Score: A Survey of UK General Practitioners' Knowledge and Attitudes.基于多基因风险评分的风险分层乳腺癌筛查:英国全科医生知识和态度的调查。
Genes (Basel). 2023 Mar 16;14(3):732. doi: 10.3390/genes14030732.
10
Women's preference to apply shared decision-making in breast cancer screening: a discrete choice experiment.女性在乳腺癌筛查中倾向于采用共同决策:一项离散选择实验。
BMJ Open. 2022 Nov 8;12(11):e064488. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064488.
针对乳腺癌风险未增加的40至74岁女性乳腺癌筛查的建议。
CMAJ. 2018 Dec 10;190(49):E1441-E1451. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.180463.
4
Ethical, Legal, and Regulatory Issues for the Implementation of Omics-Based Risk Prediction of Women's Cancer: Points to Consider.基于组学的女性癌症风险预测实施中的伦理、法律和监管问题:需考虑的要点。
Public Health Genomics. 2018;21(1-2):37-44. doi: 10.1159/000492663. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
5
Cost-effectiveness and Benefit-to-Harm Ratio of Risk-Stratified Screening for Breast Cancer: A Life-Table Model.基于生命表模型的乳腺癌风险分层筛查的成本效益和获益-危害比分析。
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Nov 1;4(11):1504-1510. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.1901.
6
Women's decision-making regarding risk-stratified breast cancer screening and prevention from the perspective of international healthcare professionals.从国际医疗保健专业人员的角度来看,女性在风险分层乳腺癌筛查和预防方面的决策。
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 1;13(6):e0197772. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197772. eCollection 2018.
7
Use of Single-Nucleotide Polymorphisms and Mammographic Density Plus Classic Risk Factors for Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.应用单核苷酸多态性和乳腺 X 线密度与经典危险因素预测乳腺癌风险。
JAMA Oncol. 2018 Apr 1;4(4):476-482. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.4881.
8
Joint associations of a polygenic risk score and environmental risk factors for breast cancer in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium.多基因风险评分与乳腺癌环境风险因素在乳腺癌协会联盟中的联合关联。
Int J Epidemiol. 2018 Apr 1;47(2):526-536. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx242.
9
The evolution of public health ethics frameworks: systematic review of moral values and norms in public health policy.公共卫生伦理框架的演变:对公共卫生政策中道德价值观和规范的系统评价
Med Health Care Philos. 2018 Sep;21(3):387-402. doi: 10.1007/s11019-017-9813-y.
10
Breast Cancer Risk Estimation and Personal Insurance: A Qualitative Study Presenting Perspectives from Canadian Patients and Decision Makers.乳腺癌风险评估与个人保险:一项呈现加拿大患者和决策者观点的定性研究
Front Genet. 2017 Sep 21;8:128. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2017.00128. eCollection 2017.