Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Cancer Prevention logoLink to Journal of Cancer Prevention
. 2018 Mar 30;23(1):51–60. doi: 10.15430/JCP.2018.23.1.51

Knowledge and Source of Information About Early Detection Techniques of Breast Cancer Among Women in Iran: A Systematic Review

Salehoddin Bouya 1, Abbas Balouchi 2,3, Sudabeh Ahmadidarehsima 4, Mahin Badakhsh 5,✉
PMCID: PMC5886495  PMID: 29629349

Abstract

Background

An increase of access to knowledge about early detection techniques of breast cancer can reduce this mortality rate. This study aimed to determine the knowledge and source of information about early detection techniques of breast cancer among Iranian women.

Methods

Both International (PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) and national (scientific information database [SID] and Magiran) databases were reviewed launching to September, 2017 to obtain related articles. Steps involving the screening, analysis of quality of the studies and extraction of papers were performed by two researchers.

Results

Of the 749 studies searched initially, 25 studies performed on 11,756 people were selected for the final stage. General knowledge for breast cancer screening among women ranged from 4.5% to 45%. The number of people with sufficient knowledge about breast self-examination in various studies was between 5% and 79.8%. The most important source of information was the Healthcare team.

Conclusions

Considering the poor knowledge and different source of information, it is suggested that educational programs be conducted around the country especially in at-risk populations.

Keywords: Breast self-examination, Early detection of cancer, Knowledge, Iran, Systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide, breast cancer is the second leading cause of death from cancer in women.1,2 In Iran, breast cancer is common cancer with 76% of women cancer patients suffering from this malignancy.3 The results of a study in Iran showed that 23% of breast cancers were observed in women under 40 years of age, and 70% of women died from the diagnosis of advanced disease in a short period of time. The persistence of death from breast cancer in Iranian women is partly due to the low usage of breast cancer screening and late detection.4 There is evidence that among all Iranian women, one of every four women with cancer diseases is diagnosed as advanced stages breast cancer, and this has killed more than 3,742 people by 2017.3,5,6 According to the World Health Organization, the best way to control breast cancer is early diagnosis.7 The purpose of the screening program is to diagnose the disease after it starts and before it can lead to clinical symptoms. The American Cancer Society recommends the following screening methods for early detection of cancer in asymptomatic patients including: 1) Breast self-examination (BSE); 2) Clinical breast examination (CBE); and 3) Mammography.8 In developing countries including Iran, awareness of breast cancer screening methods is low.6 In Iran, with an increase in life expectancy and aging, the incidence and mortality rate of breast cancer will increase in the coming years, so that deaths caused by breast cancer are expected to increase by more than 7,000 by 2035.1,3 Given the importance of the knowledge and determining the correct age of the early diagnosis of breast cancer in the timely treatment of the disease and reducing the resulting mortality, accurate determination of women’s awareness as an epidemiologic gap can help increase the awareness of health decision-makers and determine the suitable source of information. Therefore, this systematic study was conducted to assess the knowledge and information resources about the prevention techniques of breast cancer among women in Iran.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

1. Eligibility criteria

The methods adopted for this systematic review have been developed in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews and reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) tool.9 Quantitative observational studies were included in the present study. Case series, case reports and letter to editors were excluded. The target population was women with and without breast cancer living in Iran. The knowledge and source of information about early detection of techniques of breast cancer were measured in this study. Minimum required sample size was ≥ 25 participants.

2. Search strategy and databases

Literature review was done using the medical subject headings (MeSH) and key words related to knowledge and source of information about breast cancer screening techniques in Iran. The international (MEDLINE [PubMed interface], Google Scholar, and Web of Science [Web of Science interface]) and national (scientific information database [SID] and Magiran) and National key journal (Iranian Journal of Breast Diseases) databases were searched for relevant studies without settings and language limits from lunching to 30 December 2017. Health Sciences Librarian and PRESS standard were used for creating the search strategy.10 The MEDLINE program was adopted to search in for other databases. Moreover, PROSPERO was used to search for ongoing or recently completed systematic reviews. Boolean operators (AND, OR, and NOT), MeSH, truncation “*” and related text words were used for search in title and abstract using following keywords: Knowledge, Sources of information, Breast cancer, Breast neoplasm, Breast cancer self-examination, Mammography, Clinical breast examination, Population and Iran.

3. Study selection

Results of the Literature review were exported to Endnote. Prior to the formal screening process, a calibration exercise was undertaken to pilot and refine the screening. Formal screening process of titles and abstracts were conducted by two researchers according to the eligibility criteria, and consensus method was used for solving controversies among the two researchers. The full text was obtained for all titles that met the inclusion criteria. Additional information was retrieved from the study authors in order to resolve queries regarding the eligibility criteria. The reasons for the exclusion criteria were recorded. Neither of the review authors was blinded to the journal titles, the study authors or institutions.

4. Data extraction, quality assessment

Data form items included general information (first author, brief title, province and year of publication), study characteristics (study design, sampling method, mean of data collection, setting, sample size and risk of bias, questioner characteristics and psychometric characteristics), participants characteristics (age group) and outcome measures (knowledge and source of information). The tool of Hoy et al.11 was used to assess the quality of studies. These decisions were made independently by two review authors based on the criteria for judging the risk of bias; in case of any disagreement, the consensus method was used to resolve such controversies. Studies were tabulated in chronological order.

RESULTS

1. Study selection

A total of 749 articles were retrieved from the initial search in different databases. Out of 620 non-duplicated studies in title and abstracts screening process, 575 studies were excluded due to irrelevant titles. Of 45 studies, 25 studies met the eligibility criteria. In 20 excluded studies, two studies were review, six studies were letter to editor, three studies had no full text and nine studies were of low quality and could not be included in the study. The list of studies is available at http://uploadboy.me/verhw72hohee/List of final included studie1.pdf.html (Fig. 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Study selection process.

2. Study characteristics

Final included studies were conducted on 11,756 participants; the age group range was 15 to 75 years. All the included studies used a cross-sectional design. Studies were conducted only in 16 out of 31 provinces in Iran. Of the 25 studies, three studies were from Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari,12–14 two studies were from Ardabil,15,16 while in Golestan,17,18 Isfahan,19,20 Khuzestan,21,22 Mazandaran,23,24 Yazd,25,26 Razavi Khorasan,4,27 and in other provinces were conducted one study each. Most studies were conducted at outpatient clinics (n = 14), had a simple random sampling method (n = 7), date were collected through interview (n = 19) and had low risk of bias (n = 20) (Table 1).4,12–35

Table 1.

Summary of included studies

First author Year Province Target population Sampling method Mean of data collection Setting Sample size (n) Age group (yr) Risk of bias (quality of study)
Abedzadeh19 2003 Isfahan Healthy housekeepers Multistage stratified Interview Outpatient clinics 400 20–45 >45 Low
Akhtari-Zavare28 2014 Hamedan Healthy housekeepers Purposive Interview Outpatient clinics 384 18–52 Low
Alaei Nejad29 2007 Semnan Healthy housekeepers Simple random Interview Outpatient clinics 89 20–57 Low
Asgharnia30 2013 Gilan Healthy women Convenience Interview Hospital 400 40–71 Low
Banaeian12 2006 Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Healthy housekeepers Simple random Interview Outpatient clinics 400 31.1 Moderate
Besharat17 2004 Golestan Healthy students Stratified random Interview Mixed 428 15–65 Low
Dadkhah15 2002 Ardabil Healthy housekeepers Systematic cluster Interview Outpatient clinics 150 20–50 Low
Danesh13 2002 Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Healthy staff Systematic random Self-report Ministry of education 340 20–49 >50 Low
Eyvanbagha16 2016 Ardabil Healthy staff Census Interview University 300 26–41 Low
Fazel27 2010 Razavi Khorasan Healthy woman Stratified random Interview Outpatient clinics 364 20–40 >40 Moderate
Ghorbani18 2009 Golestan Healthy staff Simple random Interview/Self-Report Mixed 330 22–54 Moderate
Haghighi4 2012 Razavi Khorasan Healthy teachers Simple random Interview Ministry of education 400 20–56 Low
Hajian Tilaki23 2015 Mazandaran Healthy woman Cluster sampling Interview Outpatient clinics 500 20–65 Low
Iurigh24 2016 Mazandaran Rural healthy woman Multistage random Interview/Self-report Outpatient clinics 3,044 20–75 Low
Lalouei31 2006 Tehran Healthy woman Census Self-report Hospital 376 19–59 Moderate
Mahvari32 2003 Fars Healthy woman Random stratified Interview Outpatient clinics 1,000 35–60 Low
Zare Marzouni21 2014 Khuzestan Healthy woman Simple random Interview Outpatient clinics 1,020 15–79 Low
Moajhed25 2001 Yazd Healthy nurses and midwives Census Self-report Hospital 280 >20 Low
Naghibi33 2009 West Azerbaijan Healthy healthcare professionals Census Interview Outpatient clinics 89 20–60 Moderate
Navvabi-Rigi34 2012 Sistan and Balochistan Healthy students Stratified random Self-report University 385 >21 Low
Nourizadeh35 2010 East Azerbaijan Healthy woman Cluster random Interview/Self-report Health center 219 30–40 Low
Reisi20 2011 Isfahan Healthy healthcare professionals Simple random Self-report Outpatient clinics 119 38.3 Low
Shahbazi14 2014 Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari Healthy healthcare professionals Census Self-report Hospital 89 31.95 Low
Talaiezadeh22 2009 Khuzestan Healthy woman Simple random Interview Health center 400 20–60 Low
Zadeh26 2016 Yazd Patients Purposive Interview Hospital 250 25–65 Low
Open in a new tab

3. Main results

1) Instruments

In general, all the instruments used in the reviewed studies were researcher-designed. The aim of the questionnaires was to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice about early detection techniques of breast cancer. The total number of items in different questionnaires ranged from 20 to 54. Of the 25 studies, only 14 studies analyzed the reliability of used instruments. The reliability of the instruments was investigated by test-retest, and results of the Cronbach alpha were between 0.6414 and 0.95.30 In nineteen studies, the validity of used instruments was approved by opinions of experts from the related disciplines.

2) Knowledge of breast self-examination, clinical brest examination, and mammography

From among the 25 included studies, 19 had reported attitudes about BSE. Knowledge about breast cancer screening methods was measured by answering whether enough awareness of breast screening techniques exists to perform the tests at the right time and with the right number of test replicates. The responses included the duality of aware/unaware, and the general knowledge for breast cancer screening among woman was classified as sufficient, moderate, and poorly informed. In Table 2,4,12–35 the results of knowledge level in general aspects of BSE, CBE, and Mammography are reported as a percentage of people with adequate knowledge of breast cancer screening methods. General knowledge for breast cancer screening among woman was reported in five studies, ranging from 4.5%30 to 45%.32 Participants’ knowledge of BSE was investigated in 22 studies. The number of people with sufficient knowledge about BSE in various studies was between 5%35 and 79.8%.20

Table 2.

Knowledge and source of information about Breast cancer early detections techniques among Iranian woman

First author Brief title Questioner characteristic Psychometric characteristic Sufficient knowledgea Source of information
Abedzadeh19 Knowledge, attitude and practice about BC screening 36 Items in four sections: demographics (9 items), knowledge (10 items), attitude (10 items), practice (7 items)
Knowledge scoring: poor (lower than 10), average (10–15), positive (16–20)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. 22%

  2. NR

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Radio/TV

  2. Healthcare team

  3. Newspaper/book

  4. Family
Akhtari-Zavare28 Knowledge towards BSE A two part questioner included demographics and knowledge Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. NR

  2. 20.6%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Media

  2. Brochure

  3. Friends

  4. Healthcare team
Alaei Nejad29 Knowledge, attitude and skill about BSE 50 Items in four sections: demographics (NR), knowledge (21 items), attitude (22 items), and skill (7 items)
Scoring: knowledge: poor (under 7), average (7–14), and good (above 14)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. NR

  2. 78.7%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team
Asgharnia30 Knowledge and practice about BC and screening tests 30 Items in three sections: demographics (13 items), knowledge (16 items), and practice (4 items)
Scoring: knowledge: poor (0–5), average (6–10), and good (11–16)		 Reliability: 0.96
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. 4.5%

  2. NR

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. TV/radio

  2. Journals

  3. Healthcare teams

  4. Internet

  5. Friends

  6. Family
Banaeian12 Knowledge, attitude and practice about BC screening 31 Items in three sections: knowledge (11 items), attitude (16 items), practice (4 item)
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 5), good (up 5)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. 3.7%

  2. 37.8%

  3. 7.8%

  4. 6%

  1. Healthcare team
Besharat17 Knowledge towards BSE A two-part questionnaire included: demographics and knowledge Reliability: NR
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 17.1%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Clases

  2. Media

  3. Brochure
Dadkhah15 Knowledge, attitude and practice about BSE 36 Items in four sections: demographics (NR), knowledge (22 items), attitude (6 item), practice (10 item)
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 8), average (8–14), good (up 14)		 Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.87
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 14%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Heath care team

  2. Media
Danesh13 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BSE A four-part questionnaire included: demographics, knowledge, attitude and practice
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 8), average (8–29), good (up 29).		 Reliability: 0.85
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 17%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Eyvanbagha16 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BSE 54 Items in four sections: demographics (14 item), knowledge (29 item), attitude (11 item),practice (NR)
Knowledge scoring: poor (0–9), average (10–19), and good (20–29)		 Reliability: Cronbach’s alpha = 0.8
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 56.50%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Books

  2. Healthcare team

  3. Internet

  4. TV/Radio

  5. Seminars
Fazel27 Knowledge, and performance about BSE A four-part questionnaire included: demographics, knowledge, practice and overall knowledge
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 7), average (7–14), good (up 14)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 12.1%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Ghorbani18 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BSE 38 Items in four sections: demographics (6 item), knowledge (15 item), attitude (12 item), practice (6 item)
Knowledge scoring: poor (11–17), average (18–46), good (37–55)		 Reliability: 0.88
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 28.3%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Haghighi4 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BC screening 67 Items in four sections: demographics (14 item), practice: (7 item), knowledge (27 item), attitude (19 item)
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 30%), average (30%–60%), good (above 60%)		 Reliability: 0.72
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 12%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Hajian Tilaki23 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BC screening A four-part questionnaire included: demographics, knowledge (22 items), health belief (6 items), and practice (3 items)
Knowledge scoring: poor (under 7), average (7–10), good (11–14)		 Reliability: 0.8
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. 14.8%

  2. NR

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team

  2. Magazine

  3. Books

  4. Brochure
Iurigh24 Knowledge, attitude, practice about BC screening A four-part questionnaire included: demographics, knowledge, attitude and practice
Knowledge scoring: poor (−10–0), average (0–10), good (11–20)		 Reliability: 0.82
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 8.6%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Lalouei31 Knowledge A two-part questionnaire included: demographics and knowledge items
Scoring: NR		 Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. NR

  2. 64.4%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. CDs

  2. Class

  3. Healthcare team
Mahvari32 Knowledge and practice BC screening A four-part questionnaire included: demographics (knowledge and practice)
Scoring: NR		 Reliability: NR
Validity: by experts in field

  1. 45%

  2. 46.3%

  3. 76%

  4. 33.8%

 NR
Zare Marzouni21 Awareness, attitude towards BSE A three part questionnaire included: demographic, knowledge, and BC risk factors
Scoring: NR		 Reliability: 0.86
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 20.2%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Moajhed25 Awareness, practice towards BSE A two-part questionnaire included: demographics and Knowledge, attitude and practice
Knowledge scoring: poor (0–5), average (6–9), good (10–13)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. NR

  2. 13.21%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Naghibi33 Knowledge, attitude, practice towards BSE 43 Items in four sections: demographics (10 items), Attitude (13 items), knowledge (10 items), practice (10 items)
Knowledge scoring: poor (≤ 8), average (9–14), good (≥14)		 Reliability: 0.85
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 50.6%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Navvabi-Rigi34 Knowledge, attitude towards BSE A three-part questionnaire included: demographic, knowledge, and attitude.
Scoring: NR		 Reliability: 0.7
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 33.9%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team

  2. Books

  3. TV/Radio

  4. Friends
Nourizadeh35 Knowledge A four-part questionnaire included: demographic, knowledge, practice attitude.
Knowledge scoring: poor (≤ 6), average (6–12), good (13–18)		 Reliability: 0.77
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 5%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team

  2. Newpapers

  3. Books

  4. Journals

  5. Media

  6. Friends
Reisi20 Knowledge, attitude, practice towards BSE 42 Items in a section: demographics (6 items), knowledge (20 items), attitude (10 items), practice (6 items)
Scoring: NR		 Reliability: 0.88
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 79.8%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Shahbazi14 Knowledge and attitude towards BSE 35 Items in four sections: demographics, knowledge, attitude
Knowledge scoring: very poor (0–5), poor (6–10), average (11–15), good (16–20).		 Reliability: 0.64
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 34.8%

  3. NR

  4. NR

 NR
Talaiezadeh22 Knowledge towards BSE A two-part questionnaire included: demographic and knowledge
Knowledge scoring: NR		 Reliability: NR
Validity: NR

  1. NR

  2. 26%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team

  2. Media
Zadeh26 Awareness and attitude towards BSE 20 items in three sections: demographics, knowledge, attitude
Knowledge scoring: poor (0), average (1–3), good (4–6)		 Reliability: NR
Validity: approved by experts in field

  1. NR

  2. 6.2%

  3. NR

  4. NR

  1. Healthcare team

  2. Media

  3. Friends
Open in a new tab

NR, none reported; BC, breast cancer; BSE, breast self-examination; CBE, clinical breast examination.

*

Sufficient knowledge: 1, General knowledge; 2, BSE, 3. CBE; 4, Mammography.

Knowledge about CBE and Mammography was only mentioned in two studies, with the awareness of CBE rated between 7.8%12 and 76%.32 The awareness of mammography was between 6%12 and 33.8%.32

3) Source of information about breast self- examination, clinical brest examination, and mammography

The information sources used by the participants were listed in 14 studies. The most important sources of information in terms of the number of studies used were the healthcare team (13 studies), TV/radio/media (10 studies), family/friends (six studies), and books (five studies) (Table 3).12,15–17,19,22,23,26,28–31,34,35

Table 3.

Sources of information about BSE, CBE, and mammography

Study Sources of information
Healthcare team Books/brochure Internet Seminars/CDs/classes TV/radio/media Newspaper/journals Family/family
Abedzadeh et al.19 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Akhtari-Zavare et al.28 ✓ ✓ ✓
Alaei Nejad et al.29 ✓
Asgharnia et al.30 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Banaeian et al.12 ✓
Besharat et al.17 ✓ ✓ ✓
Dadkhah and Mohammadi15 ✓ ✓
Eyvanbagha et al.16 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Hajian Tilaki and Auladi23 ✓ ✓ ✓
Lalouei and Kashani-Zadeh31 ✓ ✓
Navvabi-Rigi34 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Nourizadeh et al.35 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Talaiezadeh22 ✓ ✓
Zadeh26 ✓ ✓ ✓
Open in a new tab

BSE, breast self-examination; CBE, clinical breast examination.

DISCUSSION

This study was performed aiming at determining the knowledge and source of information on breast cancer screening techniques in Iran. Twenty-five studies on 11,756 participants were included in the final stage. The instruments used in all of the studies were researcher made based on expert opinions and literature review.

The instruments used in many studies in the countries of Oman36 and Ethiopia37 were author-made. General knowledge for breast cancer screening among woman was reported in five studies, which ranged from 4.5% to 45%. In various studies in Ethiopia (57.8%),38 Uganda (61.3%)36 and the United States (76.4%),39 the knowledge rate was higher than the current study, which could be due to introduction and better implementation of breast cancer prevention programs and higher levels of community literacy in these countries.

Participants’ knowledge of BSE in this study was 30.6%, which is a low level–like Angola in which only 35% had sufficient knowledge.40 However, in countries like Iraq (38.8%)41 and Cameroon (73.5%),42 the level was higher despite the fact that Iran has a better position with regard to the level of literacy and socioeconomic status. A study by Khokher et al.43 in Pakistan showed that only 27% of participants had enough insight into BSE.

Knowledge about Mammography was between 6% and 33.8%. But in a study conducted in Nigeria, only 5.1% had adequate knowledge of mammography.44 However, in Malaysia (50%),45 it was higher than the current study, which could be due to high awareness and knowledge of Malaysian screening methods. Knowledge about CBE ranged from 7.8% to 76%; The result was almost as low as Mali (20%).46 The information sources used by the participants were listed in 14 studies. The most important information sources in terms of the number of studies used were the healthcare team, TV/radio/media, family/friends. In a study by Obajimi et al.,44 the most important information sources were newspapers and magazines. The systematic review in Nigeria revealed the most important resource as TV.2 Differences in the information resources used in various studies can be due to the availability of these resources in each country. This difference could be due to the existence of various educational programs on breast cancer in the developed world and the existence of supportive services in these countries. The strengths of this study were: According to our searches, this is the first systematic review in this area. The studies were made without any time limitations. The most important limitation was the use of researcher made instruments to determine the knowledge. Due to the lack of complete information in most studies, contact was made with the authors to gain extra information. The present systematic review conducted aimed to determine the knowledge and source of information towards breast cancer early detection among Iranian woman. The main results showed that only one of third of women had sufficient knowledge about BSE. The main source of information was healthcare team members. According to the results of this study, it is recommended that a national study is conducted to determine the real status of knowledge in Iran and provide educational materials among women, specifically in regions with poor level of literacy.

Footnotes

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Enayatrad M, Amoori N, Salehiniya H. Epidemiology and trends in breast cancer mortality in Iran. Iran J Public Health 2015;44: 430–1. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Ojewusi AA, Obembe T, Arulogun OS, Olugbayela T. Breast cancer awareness, attitude and screening practices in Nigeria: a systematic review. Clin Rev Opinions 2016;7:11–25. 10.5897/CRO16.0101 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Valipour AA, Mohammadian M, Ghafari M, Mohammadian- Hafshejani A. Predict the future incidence and mortality of breast cancer in Iran from 2012–2035. Iran J Public Health 2017; 46:579–80. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Haghighi F, Portaghali P, Rafaty Javanbakht L, Ghanbarzadeh N, Hosseini SM. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of female teachers regarding breast cancer screening in Birjand. Mod Care J 2012;9:146–55. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Moodi M, Hassanzadeh A, Charkazi A, Shahnazi H, Sharifirad G. A survey of the psycho-cognitive factors affecting breast cancer screening behaviors at different stages of change among female teachers in Isfahan, Iran. J Health Syst Res 2011;7:770–81. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ghodsi Z, Salehi A, Hojjatoleslami S. Knowledge of Iranian women about warning signs and risk factors for breast cancer. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2013;93:343–8. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.201 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lamyian M, Heidarnia AR, Ahmadi F, Faghihzadeh S, Aguilar-Vafaie M. Women’s prospect of breast cancer early detection behavior: a qualitative research. J Birjand Univ Med Sci 2008;15: 88–102. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Harris DM, Miller JE, Davis DM. Racial differences in breast cancer screening, knowledge and compliance. J Natl Med Assoc 2003;95:693–701. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DGPRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000097. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;75:40–6. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Hoy D, Brooks P, Woolf A, Blyth F, March L, Bain C, et al. Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:934–9. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2011.11.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Banaeian S, Kazemian A, Kheiri S. Knowledge, attitude and practice about breast cancer screening and related factors among women referred to health care centers in Boroujen in 2005. J Shahrekord Univ Med Sci 2006;7:28–34. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Danesh A, Amiri M, Zamani A, Tazhibi M, Ganji F. Knowledge, attitude and practice (KAP) rate of women employees of education organization about breast self-examination, Shahrekord, 1998. J Shahrekord Univ Med Sci 2002;4:47–52. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Shahbazi S, Heidari M. Assessment of the knowledge and attitudes of nursing and midwifery personnel about breast self- examination. Iran J Obstet Gynecol Infertil 2014;17:7–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Dadkhah B, Mohammadi M. Knowledge, attitude and practice of women in ardabil about breast self- examination, 2000. J Ardabil Univ Med Sci 2002;2:14–20. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Eyvanbagha R, Kamran A, Nasiri K, Habibi A, Mozafari P, Shamkhali R. Knowledge, attitude and practice of female employees in Khalkhal Faculty of Medical Sciences of breast self-examination and its relationship with some individual characteristics. Taṣvīr-i salāmat 2016;6:41–7. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Besharat B, Bakhshandehnosrat S, Rabiee MR. Awareness of the female students, health care personnel and patients to self breast exam. Iran J Nurs 2004;17:71–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ghorbani M, Abdulahi A. Comparison knowledge, attitude and practice of barest self examination. Iran J Breast Dis 2009;2: 36–42. [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Abedzadeh M, Sadat Z, Saberi F. Knowledge, attitude, and performance of women referring health care centers in Kashan towards breast cancer and its screening tests. FEYZ J 2003;7:85–92. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Reisi M, Javadzadeh SH, Sharifirad G, Yarmohammadi P. Knowledge, attitudes and practice of breast self-examination among female health workers in Isfahan, Iran. Health Syst Res 2011;7:191–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zare Marzouni H, Lavasani Z, Shalilian M, Najibpour R, Saadat Fakhr M, Nazarzadeh R, et al. Women’s awareness and attitude toward breast self-examination in Dezful City, Iran, 2013. Iran Red Crescent Med J 2014;17:e17829. 10.5812/ircmj.17829 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Talaiezadeh A. Knowledge of women over 18 years of age referred to health centers of Ahwaz for breast cancer self examination. Sci Med J 2009;7:503–12. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Hajian Tilaki K, Auladi S. Awareness, attitude, and practice of breast cancer screening women, and the associated socio-demographic characteristics, in Northern Iran. Iran J Cancer Prev 2015;8:e3429. 10.17795/ijcp.3429 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Iurigh HK, Majdi M, Hajtalebi H, Ghorbani A, Hajtalebi H. Knowledge, attitudes and practices towards breast cancer screening programs among Iranian rural female populations in North Of Iran. Int J Life Sci Pharm Res 2016;6:14–23. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Moajhed S. Knowledge and practice of nursing and midwifery personnel in Yazd hospitals in relation to breast self-examination. JSSU 2001;9:82–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Zadeh FK. Analysis of the awareness and attitudes of female patients regarding breast self-examination in the gynecology clinic of shohahdaye kargar hospial of yazd (IRAN) in 2011–2012. Int J Pure Appl Zool 2016;4:61–64. [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Fazel N. Breast self-examination: knowledge, and performance among upper 20 year old women in medical-health centers in sabzevar-Iran in 2010. Iran J Breast Dis 2010;3:49–54. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Akhtari-Zavare M, Ghanbari-Baghestan A, Latiff LA, Matinnia N, Hoseini M. Knowledge of breast cancer and breast self-examination practice among Iranian women in Hamedan, Iran. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014;15:6531–4. 10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.16.6531 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Alaei Nejad F, Abbasian M, Delvarianzadeh M. Evaluation of the knowledge, attitude and skills among the health volunteers regarding the breast self-examination in Shahroud. Knowledge Health 2007;2:23–27. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Asgharnia M, Faraji R, Zahiri Z, Salamat F, Mosavi Chahardah SM, Sefati S. A study of knowledge and practice of woman about breast cancer and its screening, in the case of women who referred to Alzahra Hospital in rasht during 2010–2011. Iran J Surg 2013;21:50–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Lalouei A, Kashani-Zadeh N. Rate of woman’s awareness about self breast examination in Najmieh and Baqiyatollah Hospitals referrers. Arch Rehabilit 2006;7:66–9. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Mahvari K. Knowledge and practice of women referring to health centers in Shiraz about breast cancer screening. Hormozgan Med J 2003;7:68–74. [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Naghibi A, Vahid Shahi K, Yazddani J, Noshnaei F. Knowledge, attitude and practice of male community health workers in Mako township, Iran about beast self-examination. SJSPH 2009; 7:61–8. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Navvabi-Rigi SD. Breast cancer and breast self-examination: knowledge and attitude based on the health belief model in female students of the faculty of literature and engineering of Sistan and Baluchestan University. Iran J Breast Dis 2012;5:65–72. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Nourizadeh R, Bakhtarimoghadam F, Sahebi L. Knowledge, health beliefs and breast cancer screening behaviors of women referring to health centers of Tabriz, 2010. Iran J Breast Dis 2010;3:43–51. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Godfrey K, Agatha T, Nankumbi J. Breast cancer knowledge and breast self-examination practices among female university students in Kampala, Uganda: a descriptive study. Oman Med J 2016;31:129–34. 10.5001/omj.2016.25 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Birhane K, Alemayehu M, Anawte B, Gebremariyam G, Daniel R, Addis S, et al. Practices of breast self-examination and associated factors among female debre berhan university students. Int J Breast Cancer 2017;2017:8026297. 10.1155/2017/8026297 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lemlem SB, Sinishaw W, Hailu M, Abebe M, Aregay A. Assessment of knowledge of breast cancer and screening methods among nurses in university hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2011. ISRN Oncol 2013;2013:470981. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Townsend JS, Stormo AR, Roland KB, Buenconsejo-Lum L, White S, Saraiya M. Current cervical cancer screening knowledge, awareness, and practices among U.S. affiliated pacific island providers: opportunities and challenges. Oncologist 2014;19:383–93. 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0340 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Sambanje MN, Mafuvadze B. Breast cancer knowledge and awareness among university students in Angola. Pan Afr Med J 2012;11:70. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Hasan TN, Shah SA, Hassan MR, Safian N, Azhar ZI, Syed Abdul Rahim SS, et al. Poor knowledge and practice towards breast cancer among women in Baghdad City, Iraq. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015;16:6669–72. 10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.15.6669 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Nde FP, Assob JC, Kwenti TE, Njunda AL, Tainenbe TR. Knowledge, attitude and practice of breast self-examination among female undergraduate students in the University of Buea. BMC Res Notes 2015;8:43. 10.1186/s13104-015-1004-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Khokher S, Qureshi W, Mahmood S, Saleem A, Mahmud S. Knowledge, attitude and preventive practices of women for breast cancer in the educational institutions of Lahore, Pakistan. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011;12:2419–24. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Obajimi MO, Ajayi IO, Oluwasola AO, Adedokun BO, Adeniji- Sofoluwe AT, Mosuro OA, et al. Level of awareness of mammography among women attending outpatient clinics in a teaching hospital in Ibadan, South-West Nigeria. BMC Public Health 2013;13:40. 10.1186/1471-2458-13-40 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Al-Dubai SA, Qureshi AM, Saif-Ali R, Ganasegeran K, Alwan MR, Hadi JI. Awareness and knowledge of breast cancer and mammography among a group of Malaysian women in Shah Alam. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011;12:2531–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Kohler RE, Gopal S, Lee CN, Weiner BJ, Reeve BB, Wheeler SB. Breast cancer knowledge, behaviors, and preferences in Malawi: implications for early detection interventions from a discrete choice experiment. J Glob Oncol 2017;3:480–9. 10.1200/JGO.2016.005371 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Cancer Prevention are provided here courtesy of Korean Society of Cancer Prevention

RESOURCES