What causes breast cancer? A systematic review of causal attributions among breast cancer survivors and how these compare to expert-endorsed risk factors

Abstract

What causes breast cancer? A systematic review of causal attributions among breast cancer survivors and how these compare to expert endorsed risks'. Cancer Causes and Control, vol 25 (7) 2014, pp. 771-785. Copyright (2014) Springer International PublishingSwitzerland. All rights reserved. Please note that any alterations made during the publishing process may not appear in this version.The final publication is available at Springer via http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10552-014-0377-3. psychological. Lifestyle-related attributions such as physical inactivity were coded as internal to the individual and modifiable. By contrast, environmental attributions such as air pollution and occupational hazards were considered external to the individual and fixed or non-modifiable. These characteristics tended to correlate so that internal and unstable attributions such as lifestyle-related factors were considered controllable whereas external attributions were likely to stem from the environment and exhibited lower controllability.Although causal attributions alone will not predict patients' behaviors and explain the complexity of human actions, attribution theory provides a framework for understanding the cognitions that influence healthrelated behaviors. Beliefs that people hold with regards to the cause of their own illness influence their decision to seek help, to adhere to medical treatment and their psychological adjustment, during and after treatment [6,10]. Attribution theory also helps explain affective responses to cancer and ways of coping. In the broader population, the media is another factor that shapes understandings of breast cancer causation among women. For example, media coverage of celebrity diagnoses of breast cancer in young women may have led to underestimation of age as a risk factor [27]. Similarly, reports focused on personal accounts of affected women with a family history of breast cancer may have influenced views that breast cancer is a predominantly genetic disease [28]. Social media, particularly blog posts and discussion posts shared by breast cancer patients themselves, has also become an influential and credible forum for the promulgation of health information [29].The following systematic review serves to comprehensively summarize literature on beliefs that affected women have about the cause of their own breast cancer and contrasts this with expert consensus derived from meta-analyses of various risk factors for breast cancer. Findings of this study may inform psychoeducational interventions which can help affected women develop accurate and adaptive beliefs about the cause of their breast cancer. Methodology Data SourcesThe following PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Knowledge search was conducted on January 25, 2013:(breast cancer OR breast neoplasm) AND (caus* 1 OR attribute* OR belie* OR attitude OR illness 1 *Search term and its derivatives were used (e.g., cause, causes, causal) Inclusion/Exclusion CriteriaStudies were included in the review if they reported causal attributions or beliefs of...

Prolonged job strain and subsequent risk of cancer in women – a longitudinal study, based on the Danish Nurse Cohort

“…Prolonged job strain and subsequent risk of cancer in women -a longitudinal study, based on the Danish Nurse Cohort The role of stress in cancer risk is continuously debated, and many cancer patients attribute their illness to previous experiences of psychological stress [1]. Biological pathways for an association between stress and cancer risk include adverse lifestyle or immune suppressive effects caused by stressinduced corticosteroids reducing destruction of neoplastic cell growth [2].…”

Abolishing mammography screening programs?

“…A superficial reader of the perspective given by Biller-Andorno and Jüni (2014) would, however, be inclined to believe that the impact of mammography is minimal or negligible as these estimates (20% breast cancer mortality reduction or 1/1000 breast cancer deaths avoided over a 10-year period) are compared with those of a population survey on the subjective perception of mammography (Domenighetti et al, 2003). The questions in that survey were formulated in a way that was prone to overestimation of the subjective perception of benefits of mammography and led therefore to a considerable and unrealistic overestimation of the benefit of mammography by the women interviewed (Bulliard and Levi, 2004;Dumalaon-Canaria et al, 2014).…”

Diagnostic Value of Nineteen Different Imaging Methods for Patients with Breast Cancer: a Network Meta-Analysis

“…The complicated scenarios arising in BC can be explained by its complex neoplasm and both genetic and environmental factors [6]. In addition, family history, high breast density, overweight, and environmental factors, such as X- and γ-radiation, hormones and breast-feeding, play a key part in contributing to this complicated scenario [7]. The ultimate outcome of BC relies on its initial stage at diagnosis, with the main prognostic factors being lymph node involvement, tumor size and histological grade [8].…”