Skip to main content

Table 1 Contents and origins of Daughter Sister Mother Project survey instrument items

From: Risk-management decision-making data from a community-based sample of racially diverse women at high risk of breast cancer: rationale, methods, and sample characteristics of the Daughter Sister Mother Project survey

Topic

Concepts measured

# Questions

Origin of measures

Daughter Sister Mother Project Main Survey

Total of 90–233 questions per respondent

Personal information

Race, Hispanic ethnicity, Ashkenazi Jewish descent

2

Alliance1, newly developed questions adapted from IBISv72, Claus3, and Gail4 risk prediction models

Height, weight, age

3

Newly developed

Biopsy history

1–3

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Hormonal & reproductive history

Menstrual history

2–3

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Childbearing history

1–2

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Use of hormone replacement therapy

1–4

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Risk perception

Perceived personal risk of breast cancer, cancers other than breast/ovarian

2

Gramling et al. (2006), Gurmankin Levy et al. (2006)

Cancer prevention beliefs

Belief that one can lower breast cancer risk

1

HINTS5

Family cancer history

History of cancer among relatives

9–30

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Screening behaviors

Mammogram history and feelings

1–7

BRFSS6 & ACS7 (most recent, frequency)

Newly developed (abnormal results, feelings, reasons not to be screened)

Breast MRI history and feelings

1–7

BRFSS & ACS (most recent, frequency)

Newly developed (abnormal results, feelings, reasons not to be screened)

Clinical breast exam history and feelings

1–6

BRFSS & ACS (most recent, frequency)

Newly developed (abnormal results, feelings, reasons not to be screened)

Genetic testing

Personal history of genetic testing, having heard of it, referral to genetic testing, stage of genetic testing decision, reasons for/against testing

2–6

Partially adapted from Watson et al. (1999), Green et al. (2009), newly developed

Family genetic testing history

1–9

Newly developed questions adapted from IBISv7, Claus, and Gail risk prediction models

Preventive mastectomy

Personal history of preventive mastectomy, having heard of it, stage of decision making, difficulty of decision, reasons for/against it, conditions under which would consider it, barriers to surgery, breast reconstruction, relevant feelings

1–9

Newly developed

Preventive oophorectomy

Personal history of preventive oophorectomy, having heard of it, stage of decision making, difficulty of decision, reasons for/against it, conditions under which would consider it, barriers to surgery, relevant feelings

1–9

Newly developed

Chemoprevention

Personal chemoprevention history, having heard of it, stage of decision making, difficulty of decision, reasons for/against it, conditions under which would consider it, barriers to use, relevant feelings

1–13

Newly developed

Lifestyle behaviors

Tobacco smoking behavior

1–2

BRFSS

Alcohol use

1–2

NHANES8

Exercise habits

1

HINTS

Fruit and vegetable consumption

1

Alliance (adapted form)

Belief that lifestyle changes could lower risk

1–2

Newly developed

Cancer exposure

Number of cancer cases among loved ones, relationships involved, outcomes of cancer cases

1–4

Newly developed

Emotional and physical exposure to cancer cases among loved ones

15–45

CONNECS Scale9, with the addition of a newly developed “direct involvement” subscale

Healthcare providers

Source of usual care

1–2

CITIES10

Use of relevant healthcare providers—primary care providers and specialists

2

Newly developed

Gender, length of relationship, quality of care, shared decision-making, referral patterns, discussing breast cancer risk w/ relevant providers

5–24

Newly developed, Ayanian et al. (2010), Control Preference Scale11 (adapted form)

Social support

Available types of social support

5

Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Social Support Survey12 (adapted form)

Supportiveness of family, friends, partner

3

Newly developed

Financial constraints

Current and past health insurance

2–4

CITIES, newly developed

Health status

Overall quality of life and health

2

CITIES

General mental health

5

MHI-513

Cancer worry

3

Impact of Events Scale14 (adapted form)

Comorbidities and limitations of daily living

2

Newly developed, partially based on Satariano and Ragland (1994)

Socioeconomic status, demographics

Household income and size, occupation, education, sexual orientation

5

CITIES, Alliance

Closing questions

Willingness to participate in future studies

2

Newly developed

Providing email address for gift certificate

1

Newly developed

Daughter Sister Mother Project Supplemental Survey

Total of 37–45 questions per respondent

Risk perception

Salience, severity belief, and fear of breast cancer

3

Gramling et al. (2006), Gurmankin Levy et al. (2006), newly developed items

Information gathering

Desire for information, importance of information, fear of information, confidence in obtaining information, barriers to obtaining information

5

Health Information Orientation Scale15, Autonomy Preference Index16, HINTS, Barriers to Information Scale17

Cancer exposure

Exposure to chemotherapy of a loved one

1

LILAC18

Social support

Experience & interest in support groups, experience and interest in other high-risk women, social support from partner

9–11

Newly developed, Watts et al. (2011)

Financial constraints

History of delaying/avoiding medical appointments/procedures due to financial constraints

7

CITIES (adapted form), NHIS19 (adapted form)

Caregiving responsibilities

Caregiving responsibilities for children or disabled/ill adults

2–5

Newly developed

Medical mistrust

Healthcare system mistrust

5

Health Care System Distrust Scale20

Discrimination

Experience of discrimination in health care

1–2

CARE21 (adapted form)

Religion & faith

Religious identification, attendance, strength of faith, perception that God controls health

4–6

CITIES, Schwartz et al. (2000), God Locus of Health Control scale22, newly developed

  1. 1Kahn et al. 2021 [102], Paskett, ED 2015: The Alliance Patient Questionnaire: A Pilot Study to Determine Questionnaire Feasibility (Alliance A191401)
  2. 2Tyrer, Duffy, and Cuzick 2004 [72]
  3. 3Claus, Risch, and Thompson 1994 [73]
  4. 4Gail 2015 [74]
  5. 5Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) https://hints.cancer.gov/ [76]
  6. 6Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) https://www.cdc.gov/brfss/index.html [100]
  7. 7American Community Survey (ACS) - https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs [99]
  8. 8National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/index.htm [86]
  9. 9Hawkins et al. 2012 [85]
  10. 10Community Initiative Towards Improving Equity and Health Status (CITIES)—Paskett et al. 2019 [98]
  11. 11Denger, Sloan, and Venkatesh 1997 [97]
  12. 12https://www.rand.org/health-care/surveys_tools/mos/social-support.html [96]
  13. 13Mental Health Inventory 5—Cuijpers et al. 2009 [95]
  14. 14Horowitz et al. 1979 [94]
  15. 15DuBenske et al. 2009 [93]
  16. 16Ende et al. 1989 [92]
  17. 17Gustafson et al. 2005 [91]
  18. 18Life and Longevity After Cancer (LILAC)—Paskett et al. 2018 [90]
  19. 19National Health Interview Survey (NHIS)—https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/index.htm [89]
  20. 20Shea et al. 2008 [88]
  21. 21Paskett et al. 2020 [101]
  22. 22Wallston et al. 1999 [87]