Impact of Breast Cancer Awareness Month on Public Interest in the United States between 2012 and 2021: A Google Trends Analysis

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) has a long history of over 30 years, established in 1985 to occur every October, and the National Breast Cancer Foundation now leads the operation. There have been no studies to evaluate the impact of the BCAM on public awareness of breast cancer. We analyzed the impact of BCAM on public awareness of breast cancer in the U.S. from 2012 to 2021 using the relative search volume (RSV) of Google Trends as a surrogate. We also analyzed the impact of Lung Cancer Awareness Month (LCAM) and Prostate Cancer Awareness Month (PCAM) on public awareness of lung and prostate cancer, respectively, to see differences in their effectiveness among the health observances for the top three most common cancers in the U.S. We performed a joinpoint regression analysis to identify statistically significant time points of a change in trend. There were joinpoints around BCAM for “Breast cancer” every year from 2012 to 2021, with a significant increase in the weekly RSVs from 21.9% to 46.7%. Except for 2013 and 2015 for “Lung cancer”, when significant increases in the RSV at 1.8% and 1.2% per week were observed around LCAM, no joinpoints were noted around LCAM or PCAM. These results imply that BCAM has successfully improved the public awareness of breast cancer in the U.S. compared to other representative health observances, likely due to the effective involvement of non-medical industries, influencers affected by breast cancer, and an awareness symbol.

Related collections

Most cited references 27

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review

(2012)

Whether breast cancer screening does more harm than good has been debated extensively. The main questions are how large the benefit of screening is in terms of reduced breast cancer mortality and how substantial the harm is in terms of overdiagnosis, which is defined as cancers detected at screening that would not have otherwise become clinically apparent in the woman's lifetime. An independent Panel was convened to reach conclusions about the benefits and harms of breast screening on the basis of a review of published work and oral and written evidence presented by experts in the subject. To provide estimates of the level of benefits and harms, the Panel relied mainly on findings from randomised trials of breast cancer screening that compared women invited to screening with controls not invited, but also reviewed evidence from observational studies. The Panel focused on the UK setting, where women aged 50-70 years are invited to screening every 3 years. In this Review, we provide a summary of the full report on the Panel's findings and conclusions. In a meta-analysis of 11 randomised trials, the relative risk of breast cancer mortality for women invited to screening compared with controls was 0·80 (95% CI 0·73-0·89), which is a relative risk reduction of 20%. The Panel considered the internal biases in the trials and whether these trials, which were done a long time ago, were still relevant; they concluded that 20% was still a reasonable estimate of the relative risk reduction. The more reliable and recent observational studies generally produced larger estimates of benefit, but these studies might be biased. The best estimates of overdiagnosis are from three trials in which women in the control group were not invited to be screened at the end of the active trial period. In a meta-analysis, estimates of the excess incidence were 11% (95% CI 9-12) when expressed as a proportion of cancers diagnosed in the invited group in the long term, and 19% (15-23) when expressed as a proportion of the cancers diagnosed during the active screening period. Results from observational studies support the occurrence of overdiagnosis, but estimates of its magnitude are unreliable. The Panel concludes that screening reduces breast cancer mortality but that some overdiagnosis occurs. Since the estimates provided are from studies with many limitations and whose relevance to present-day screening programmes can be questioned, they have substantial uncertainty and should be regarded only as an approximate guide. If these figures are used directly, for every 10,000 UK women aged 50 years invited to screening for the next 20 years, 43 deaths from breast cancer would be prevented and 129 cases of breast cancer, invasive and non-invasive, would be overdiagnosed; that is one breast cancer death prevented for about every three overdiagnosed cases identified and treated. Of the roughly 307,000 women aged 50-52 years who are invited to begin screening every year, just over 1% would have an overdiagnosed cancer in the next 20 years. Evidence from a focus group organised by Cancer Research UK and attended by some members of the Panel showed that many women feel that accepting the offer of breast screening is worthwhile, which agrees with the results of previous similar studies. Information should be made available in a transparent and objective way to women invited to screening so that they can make informed decisions. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 189 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Benefits and Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review.

Evan Myers, Patricia Moorman, Jennifer M. Gierisch … (2015)

Patients need to consider both benefits and harms of breast cancer screening.

0 comments Cited 186 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

COVID-19, Lockdowns and Well-Being: Evidence from Google Trends

Abel Brodeur, Andrew Clark, Sarah Fleche … (2020)

Highlights • We look at the effect of COVID-19 and associated lockdowns on population well-being • We use Google Trends data to measure changes in well-being related topic search-terms • We find an increase in searches for boredom, loneliness, worry and sadness • We find a decrease in searches for stress, suicide and divorce • We see evidence of mean-reversion in some (but not all) of the well-being measures