Table 1.
Validation studies that reported sensitivity and specificity values for self-reported first-degree relative’s breast cancer history
| Authors |
Breast cancer cases |
Healthy noncases |
Source population | “Gold standard” measurement tool(s) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity (No./Total) (95% CI) | Specificity (No./Total) (95% CI) | Sensitivity (No./Total) (95% CI) | Specificity (No./Total) (95% CI) | |||
| Chang et al20 | – | – | 0.72 (61/85) (0.62, 0.81) | 0.99 (1114/1127) (0.98, 0.99) | Sweden | Swedish Cancer Registry |
| Kerber and Slattery34 | 0.85 (11/13) (0.55, 0.98) | 0.96 (107/112) (0.90, 0.99) | 0.82 (18/22) (0.60, 0.95) | 0.91 (167/184) (0.87, 0.95) | Utah, USA | Utah Population Database |
| Soegaard et al21 | – | – | 0.94 (121/129) (0.90, 0.98) | 1.00 (4505/4527) (0.99, 1.00) | Denmark | Danish Cancer Registry |
| Verkooijen et al35 | 0.98 (60/61) (0.91, 1.00) | 0.99 (247/249) (0.97, 1.00) | – | – | Geneva, Switzerland | Cantonal Population Office and Geneva Cancer Registry |
| Ziogas and Anton-Culver36 | 0.95 (188/197) (0.93, 0.98) | 0.97 (850/873) (0.96, 0.98) | – | – | Orange County, California, USA | Pathology, self-reported, or death certificates |
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.