Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

British Journal of Cancer
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. british journal of cancer
  3. regular article
  4. article
Cancer risk perceptions and distress among women attending a familial ovarian cancer clinic
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Regular Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 27 February 2001

Cancer risk perceptions and distress among women attending a familial ovarian cancer clinic

  • A Cull1,
  • A Fry1,
  • R Rush1 &
  • …
  • C M Steel2 

British Journal of Cancer volume 84, pages 594–599 (2001)Cite this article

  • 922 Accesses

  • 40 Citations

  • Metrics details

This article has been updated

Abstract

Of 230 women referred to a familial ovarian cancer clinic, 196 (85%) completed a questionnaire before they attended. The data collected included pre-counselling risk perceptions and an assessment of distress. Respondents were more likely to underestimate (44%) than overestimate (19%) their risk. Those with a family history of breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) were particularly likely to underestimate their ovarian cancer risk. The variables assessed in this study – sociodemographic, family history, distress, anxiety proneness, coping style and beliefs about health control – explained little of the observed variation in accuracy of risk perception. On the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-30) 30% of the sample obtained scores above the cut-off (≥ 6) recommended for screening for ‘case-level’ psychological distress. Women exhibiting case-level distress were more likely to overestimate their risk (OR = 2.3). On univariate analysis low internal locus of control was associated with ‘case-level’ distress (P = 0.008). On multiple regression the best predictors of ‘caseness’ were high-trait anxiety, being a graduate and inaccurate risk perception. There was no difference in the level of distress shown by women with HBOC vs. those with a history of ovarian cancer only. Implications of these findings for the counselling needs of the women are discussed. The effectiveness of the clinic in improving the accuracy of risk perceptions and relieving distress is being assessed. © 2001 Cancer Research Campaign

Similar content being viewed by others

Impact of the APOBEC3A/B deletion polymorphism on risk of ovarian cancer

Article Open access 06 December 2021

Data-driven analysis of a validated risk score for ovarian cancer identifies clinically distinct patterns during follow-up and treatment

Article Open access 01 October 2022

Predicting prognosis for epithelial ovarian cancer patients receiving bevacizumab treatment with CT-based deep learning

Article Open access 13 September 2024

Article PDF

Change history

  • 16 November 2011

    This paper was modified 12 months after initial publication to switch to Creative Commons licence terms, as noted at publication

References

  • Audrain J, Schwartz MD and Lerman C (1997) Psychological distress among women seeking genetic counselling for breast–ovarian cancer risk: the contribution of personality and appraisal. Ann Behav Med 19: 370–377

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cox B, Blaxter M and Buckle A (1987). The Health and Lifestyle Survey, Cambridge: Health Promotion Research Trust

    Google Scholar 

  • Cull A, Anderson EDC, Campbell S, Mackay J, Smyth E and Steel M (1999) The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women’s risk perceptions and levels of distress. Br J Cancer 79: 501–508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cuzick J (1985) A Wilcoxon type test for trend. Stat Med 4: 87–90

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daly MB and Lerman C (1993) Ovarian cancer risk counselling: a guide for the practitioner. Oncology 7: 27–34

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Evans DGR, Burnell LD, Hopwood P and Howell A (1993) Perception of risk in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 67: 612–614

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Evans DGR, Blair V, Greenhalgh R, Hopwood P and Howell A (1994) The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 70: 934–938

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ford D, Easton DF and Peto J (1995) Estimates of the gene frequency of BRCA1 and its contribution to breast and ovarian cancer incidence. AM J Human Genetics 57: 1457–1462

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fry A, Busby-Earle C, Rush R and Cull A Long term psychosocial adjustment to prophylactic oophorectomy in women at increased risk of ovarian cancer. PsychoOncology,

  • Goldberg DO and Williams P (1988). GHQ: A Users Guide to the General Health Questionnaire, NFER-Nelson: Windsor

    Google Scholar 

  • Green J, Murton F and Stratham H (1993) Psychosocial issues raised by a familial ovarian cancer register. J Med Genet 30: 575–579

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hallowell N and Richards MPM (1997) Understanding life’s lottery: an evaluation of studies of genetic risk awareness. J Health Psychol 2: 31–43

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs I and Lancaster J (1996) The molecular genetics of sporadic and familial epithelial ovarian cancer. Int J Gynaecol Cancer 6: 337–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs I, Mackay J and Skates S (1997). UKCCCR National Familial Ovarian Cancer Screening study, OCS Study Registration Centre, Addenbrooke's Hospital: Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Kash KM and Dabney MK Ortega-Vardejo (2000). Group intervention for women at genetic risk for breast cancer, (March 9th, 2000).

  • Knight RG, Waal Manning HJ and Spears GF (1983) Some norms and reliability data for the State Trait Anxiety Inventory and Zung Self Rating Depression Scale. Br J Clin Psychol 22: 245–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd S, Watson M and Waites B (1996) Familial breast cancer: a controlled study of risk perception psychological morbidity and health beliefs in women attending for genetic counselling. Br J Cancer 74: 482–487

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mackay J, Crosbie AEC, Steel CM, Smart GE and Smyth JF (1995) Clinical and ethical dilemmas in familial ovarian cancer. Chapter 8 In: Sharp F, Blackett A, Leahe R, Berek J (eds) Ovarian Cancer, London: Chapman-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks G, Richardson JL, Graham JW and Levine A (1986) Role of health locus of control beliefs and expectations of treatment in adjustment to cancer. J Pers Soc Psychol 51: 443–450

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Miller SM (1987) Monitoring and blunting: validation of a questionnaire to assess styles of information seeking under threat. J Pers & Soc Psychol 52: 345–353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rees G, Fry A, Cull A . A family history of breast cancer. Women’s experiences from a theoretical perspective. Soc Sci & Med,

  • Robinson GE, Rosen BP, Bradley LN, Rockfert WG, Carr ML, Cole DEC and Murphy KJ (1997) Psychological impact of screening for familial ovarian cancer: Reactions to initial assessment. Gynaecol Oncol 65: 197–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz MD, Lerman C, Miller SM, Daly M and Maisny A (1995) Coping predisposition, perceived risk and psychological distress among women at increased risk for ovarian cancer. Health Psychology 14: 3) 232–235

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard R, Fry A, Rush R, Steel CM and Cull A Women at risk of ovarian cancer: attitudes towards and expectations of the familial ovarian cancer clinic. Familial Cancer,

  • Spielberger C (1983) Manual for the State Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press: Palo Alto, Ca

  • Steptoe A (1989) An abbreviated version of the Miller Behavioural Style Scale. Br J Clin Psychol 28: 183–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stratton JF, Gayther SA, Russell P and Dearden J (1997) Contribution of BRCA1 mutations to ovarian cancer. N Eng J Med 336: 1125–1130

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wallston KA and Wallston BS (1978) Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales. Health Educ Monogr 6: 2 160–170

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle J (1995) Women at risk of ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr No 17: 81–85

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Psychology Research Group, Imperial Cancer Research Fund (ICRF) Medical Oncology Unit, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU

    A Cull, A Fry & R Rush

  2. School of Biological and Medical Sciences, University of St Andrews, Bute Medical Building, St Andrews, KY16 9TS, Fife, UK

    C M Steel

Authors
  1. A Cull
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A Fry
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. R Rush
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C M Steel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

From twelve months after its original publication, this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cull, A., Fry, A., Rush, R. et al. Cancer risk perceptions and distress among women attending a familial ovarian cancer clinic. Br J Cancer 84, 594–599 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1651

Download citation

  • Received: 04 April 2000

  • Revised: 05 December 2000

  • Accepted: 05 December 2000

  • Published: 27 February 2001

  • Issue date: 02 March 2001

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.2000.1651

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • ovarian cancer
  • psychological distress
  • cancer risk
  • genetic counselling

This article is cited by

  • Risk Perception and Psychological Distress in Genetic Counselling for Hereditary Breast and/or Ovarian Cancer

    • G Cicero
    • R De Luca
    • A Russo

    Journal of Genetic Counseling (2017)

  • Population-based genetic risk prediction and stratification for ovarian cancer: views from women at high risk

    • Belinda Rahman
    • Susanne F. Meisel
    • Anne Lanceley

    Familial Cancer (2015)

  • Monitoring style of coping with cancer related threats: a review of the literature

    • Pagona Roussi
    • Suzanne M. Miller

    Journal of Behavioral Medicine (2014)

  • Assessment of palliative care cancer patients’ most important concerns

    • Walter F. Baile
    • J. Lynn Palmer
    • Patricia A. Parker

    Supportive Care in Cancer (2011)

  • Australian women’s awareness of ovarian cancer symptoms, risk and protective factors, and estimates of own risk

    • Sandra C. Jones
    • Christopher A. Magee
    • Donald C. Iverson

    Cancer Causes & Control (2010)

Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • Reviews & Analysis
  • News & Comment
  • Current issue
  • Collections
  • Follow us on Twitter
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • Journal Information
  • Open access publishing
  • About the Editors
  • Contact
  • Special Issues
  • For Advertisers
  • Subscribe

Publish with us

  • For Authors & Referees
  • Language editing services
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

British Journal of Cancer (Br J Cancer)

ISSN 1532-1827 (online)

ISSN 0007-0920 (print)

nature.com sitemap

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2025 Springer Nature Limited