Table 1.

Characteristics of studies included in this review

Study	Design	Participants	Interventions	Outcomes	Allocation concealment	Method score	Notes
Bastani et al 199927	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged over 30; breast cancer in first degree relative; resident in United States or Canada	Mailed notification of individualised risk assessment and other theoretically driven (adherence model) materials tailored for women at high risk	Uptake of mammography one year after baseline survey	Unclear	15/22
Champion 199428	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged ≥35 who had never had breast cancer; United States	In-home interviews conducted by graduate nursing research assistants. Discussion about individual risk factors—susceptibility intervention—as part of a belief modifying intervention	Change in beliefs and knowledge (including susceptibility scores) after the intervention; mammography compliance one year after the intervention	Unclear	16/22
Champion et al 199529	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged ≥35; not diagnosed with breast cancer; United States (analysis of intervention effect only on women aged ≥40	Interviews conducted at home by graduate nursing students. Discussion about individual risk factors—susceptibility intervention—as part of a belief modifying intervention	Change in beliefs and knowledge (including susceptibility (scores); mammography compliance; movement across stages of change	Unclear	12/22	Raw data for compliance outcomes not available for inclusion in meta-analysis; other results included in appendix 2 on bmj.com and Cochrane review14
Curry et al 199319	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged ≥50; newly enrolled in a health maintenance organisation without prior history of breast cancer or of mammography use in the previous 12 months; United States	Mailed risk factor questionnaire plus personal risk invitation detailing personal risk factors	Use of mammography within one year of invitation	Unclear	18/22
Hutchison et al 199830	Randomised controlled trial	Patients aged 20-69 years, from two primary care group practices; Canada	Risk appraisal questionnaire (yielding risk score). People with scores above 2 were advised to go for screening	Rate of cholesterol testing during the three months of follow up	Unclear	14/22
Kreuter et al 199631	Randomised controlled trial	Patients aged 18-75 from eight family medical practices; North Carolina, United States	Mailed health risk appraisal—risk information tailored to information given at baseline questionnaire	Rate of uptake of Pap smear, mammography, and cholesterol screeing after six months in participants contemplating these behaviours at baseline	Inadequate	15/22	Multiple outcomes from overlapping groups of patients, so single figure not included in meta-analysis; separate figures reported in appendix 2 on bmj.com and Cochrane meta-analysis14
Lee 199118	Randomised controlled trial, stratified for previous screening history and risk status	Federal employees aged ≥40; United States	Appraisal of risk of colorectal—categorised as high, medium, or low personal risk	Knowledge, intention to take test, and uptake	Unclear	16/22
Lerman et al 199532	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged 35 years and older with a family history of breast cancer in a first degree relative; United States	Counselling for risk of breast cancer, including discussion of factors contributing to heightened risk and presentation of individualised risk data	Changes or improvement in risk comprehension	Adequate	13/22	Additional paper33 addresses effects on general and breast cancer specific distress
Lerman et al 199734	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged 18-75 who had at least one first degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer; United States	Educational session including a review of individual risk factors for breast and ovarian cancers	Changes in risk perception; testing intentions	Unclear	16/22	No data on taking test in control group
Myers et al 199920	Randomised controlled trial	African American men, aged 40-70; patients at the University of Chicago, United States	A personalised “pro-record,” which included a form with tailored risk factors and symptoms	“Adherence”—men who made an office visit for prostate cancer education and early detection within a year	Unclear	15/22
Rimer et al 200117	Randomised controlled trial	Women in their 40s and 50s, and members of Blue Cross Blue Shield (a health maintenance organisation); North Carolina, United States	Tailored print and counselling detailing a woman's personal risk (numerical and graphical) of breast cancer	Accuracy of risk perceptions; mammography uptake	Unclear	18/22
Saywell et al 199935	Randomised controlled trial	Women aged 50-85, non-compliant with mammography guidelines, no history of breast cancer; United States	Telephone and in person counselling including discussion of personal risk factors	Mammography compliance four to six weeks after counselling	Adequate	12/22
Schwartz et al 199936	Randomised controlled trial	Women with family history of breast cancer (first degree relative of sufferer) aged ≥40; United States	Risk counselling including individualised risk figures	Self reported mammography use one year after (compared with baseline)	Unclear		Follow up to the Lerman et al 1995 trial
Skinner et al 199437	Randomised controlled trial, stratified between clinics	Female family practice attenders aged 40-65; United States	Tailored text re: beliefs, mammography stages, risk factors, and barriers	Mammography stage and uptake	Unclear	15/22

Studies by Bastani et al,²⁷ Curry et al,¹⁹ Hutchison et al,²⁸ and Lerman and Schwartz et al³²,³⁶ were designated as studies of individuals at higher than average risk.