Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the Screening Practices of Unaffected Noncarriers under 40 and between 40 and 49 in BRCA1/2 Families

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Genetic Counseling

Abstract

This study aimed to 1) compare the cancer screening practices of unaffected noncarrier women under 40 and those aged 40 to 49, following the age-based medical screening guidelines, and 2) consider the way the patients justified their practices of screening or over-screening. For this study, 131 unaffected noncarriers—77 women under age 40 and 54 between 40 and 49, all belonging to a BRCA1/2 family—responded to a questionnaire on breast or ovarian cancer screenings they had undergone since receiving their negative genetic test results, their motives for seeking these screenings, and their intentions to pursue these screenings in the future. Unaffected noncarriers under age 40 admitted practices that could be qualified as over-screening. Apart from mammogram and breast ultrasounds, which the women under 40 reported seeking less often, these women’s screening practices were comparable to those of women between 40 and 49. Cancer prevention and a family history of cancer were the two most frequently cited justifications for pursuing these screenings. We suggest that health care professionals discuss with women under 50 the ineffectiveness of breast and ovarian cancer screenings so that they will adapt their practices to conform to medical guidelines and limit their exposure to the potentially negative impacts of early cancer screening.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agence Nationale d’Accréditation et d’Evaluation en Santé (2004). Opportunité d’étendre le programme national de dépistage du cancer du sein aux femmes âgées de 40 à 49 ans : actualisation mars 2004. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_464090/opportunite-detendre-le-programme-national-de-depistage-du-cancer-du-sein-aux-femmes-agees-de-40-a-49-ans?xtmc=&xtcr=20. Accessed 29 February 2012.

  • Antoniou, A., Pharoah, P. D., Narod, S., Risch, H. A., Eyford, J. E., Hoppe, J. L., et al. (2003). Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: A combined analysis of 22 studies. American Journal of Human Genetics, 72(5), 1117–1130.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Aro, A. R., de Koning, H. J., Absetz, P., & Schreck, M. (2001). Two distinct groups of non-attenders in an organized mammography screening program. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 70(2), 145–153.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bardin, L. (1991). L’analyse de contenu. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barratt, A., Cockburn, J., Smith, D., & Redman, S. (2000). Reliability and validity of women’s recall of mammographic screening. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 24(1), 79–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, N. T., Salz, T., & Lillie, S. E. (2007). Systematic review: The long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146, 502–510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, L. S., McQueen, D. V., Qualters, J. R., Leff, M., Garrett, C., & Calonge, N. (2003). Validity of women’s self-reports of cancer screening test utilization in a managed care population. Cancer Epidemioly, Biomarkers & Prevention, 12(11 Pt 1), 1182–1187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caruso, A., Vigna, C., Marozzo, B., Sega, F. M., Sperduti, I., Cognetti, F., & Savarese, A. (2009). Subjective versus objective risk in genetic counseling for hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancers. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 28, 157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chamot, E., & Perneger, T. V. (2002). Men’s and women’s knowledge and perceptions of breast cancer and mammography screening. Preventive Medicine, 34, 380–385.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Iversen, E. S., Friebel, T., Finkelstein, D., Weber, B. L., Eisen, A., et al. (2006). Characterization of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a large United States sample. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24(6), 863–871.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chiarelli, A. M., Majpruz, V., Brown, P., Thériault, M., Shumak, R., & Mai, V. (2009). The contribution of clinical breast examination to the accuracy of breast screening. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 101(18), 1236–1243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, J., Irwig, L., Turnbull, D., Simpson, J. M., Mock, P., & Tattersall, M. (1989). Encouraging attendance at screening mammography: knowledge, attitudes and intentions of general practitioners. Medical Journal of Australia, 151(7), 391–396.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, S. J., Price, M. A., Jenkins, M. A., McKinley, J. M., Butow, P. N., McLachlan, S. A., et al. (2008). Cancer risk management practices of noncarriers within BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families in the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation Consortium for research into familial breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26(2), 225–232.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Domchek, S. M., Gaudet, M. M., Stopfer, J. E., Fleischaut, M. H., Powers, J., Kauff, N., et al. (2010). Breast cancer risks in individuals testing negative for a known family mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 119(2), 409–414.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dorval, M., Nogues, C., Berthet, P., Chiquette, J., Gauthier-Villars, M., Lasset, C., et al. (2011). Breast and ovarian cancer screening of non-carriers from BRCA1/2 mutation-positive families: 2-year follow-up of cohorts from France and Quebec. European Journal of Human Genetics, 19(5), 494–499.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Eisinger, F., Bressac, B., Castaigne, D., Collu, P. H., Lansac, J., Lefranc, J. P., et al. (2004). Identification et prise en charge des prédispositions héréditaires aux cancers du sein et de l’ovaire (mise à jour 2004). Bulletin du Cancer, 91(3), 219–237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Enquête INCa/BVA (2010). Médecins généralistes et dépistage des cancers. www.e-cancer.fr Accessed 29 February 2012.

  • Epstein, S. A., Lin, T. H., Audrain, J., Stefanek, M., Rimer, B., & Lerman, C. (1997). Excessive breast self-examination among first-degree relatives of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. High-Risk Breast Cancer Consortium. Psychosomatics, 38(3), 253–261.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fancher, T. T., Palesty, J. A., Paszkowiak, J. J., Kiran, R. P., Malkan, A. D., & Dudrick, S. J. (2011). Can breast self-examination continue to be touted justifiably as an optional practice? International journal of surgical oncology. doi:10.1155/2011/965464.

  • Fletcher, S. W., & Elmore, J. G. (2003). Clinical practice. Mammographic screening for breast cancer. The New England Journal of Medicine, 348(17), 1672–1680.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Foster, C., Watson, M., Eeles, R., Eccles, D., Ashley, S., Davidson, R., et al. (2007). Predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 in a UK clinical cohort: Three year follow-up. British Journal of Cancer, 96(5), 718–724.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, L. C., Woodruff, A., Lane, M., Weinberg, A. D., Cooper, H. P., & Webb, J. A. (1995). Breast cancer screening behaviors and intentions among asymptomatic women 50 years of age and older. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 11(4), 218–223.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gili, A. F., Poonja, Z., & Kalra, B. B. (1993). Breast cancer screening for women younger than 40. Canadian Family Physician, 39, 65–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Giveon, S., & Kahan, E. (2000). Patient adherence to family practitioners’ recommendations for breast cancer screening: a historical cohort study. Family Practice, 17(1), 42–45.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, S. L., Milne, R. L., McLachlan, S. A., Friedlander, M. L., Birch, K. E., Weideman, P., et al. (2011). Prospective study of breast cancer risk for mutation negative women from BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation positive families. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 130, 1057–1061.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haute Autorité de Santé (2012). Participation au dépistage du cancer du sein : Recommandations de la HAS pour les femmes de 50 à 74 ans. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c_1196105/cancer-du-sein-un-nouveau-souffle-pour-le-depistage-organise. Accessed 29 February 2012

  • Hendrick, R. E., & Helvie, M. A. (2011). United States Preventive Services Task Force screening mammography recommendations science ignored. American Journal of Roentgenoly, 196, W-236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofvind, S., Ponti, A., Patnick, J., Ascunce, N., Njor, S., Broeders, M., & Van Hal, G. (2012). False-positive results in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review and survey of service screening programmes. Journal of Medical Screening, 19(Suppl 1), 57–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoskins, L. M., Roy, K. M., & Greene, M. H. (2012). Toward a new understanding of risk perception among young female BRCA1/2 “previvors”. Families, Systems & Health, 30(1), 32–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. (2012). The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet, 380(9855), 1778–1786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institut National du Cancer (2010). Les recommandations en matière de dépistage des cancers : propositions pour un nouveau modèle. http://www.e-cancer.fr/toutes-les-actualites/235/4548-les-recommandations-en-matiere-de-depistage-des-cancers-propositions-pour-un-nouveau-modele. Accessed 29 February 2012

  • Institut National du Cancer (2012). Dépistage du cancer du sein : qui est concerné ? http://www.e-cancer.fr/depistage/depistage-du-cancer-du-sein/espace-grand-public/qui-est-concerne-. Accessed 21 November 2012

  • Institut National du Cancer (2012). Limites et incertitudes sur le dépistage. http://www.e-cancer.fr/depistage/depistage-du-cancer-du-sein/limites-et-incertitudes-sur-le-depistage. Accessed 21 November 2012

  • Isaacs, C., Peshkin, B. N., Schwartz, M., Demarco, T. A., Main, D., & Lerman, C. (2002). Breast and ovarian cancer screening practices in healthy women with a strong family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 71(2), 103–112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Julian-Reynier, C., Mancini, J., Mouret-Fourme, E., Gauthier-Villars, M., Bonadona, V., Berthet, P., et al. (2011). Cancer risk management strategies and perceptions of unaffected women 5 years after predictive genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. European Journal of Human Genetics, 19(5), 500–506.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kadaoui, N., Guay, M., Baron, G., St-Cerny, J., & Lemaire, J. (2012). Breast cancer screening practices for women aged 35 to 49 and 70 and older. Canadian Family Physician, 58, 47–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katapodi, M. C., Lee, K. A., Facione, N. C., & Dodd, M. J. (2004). Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: a meta-analytic review. Preventive Medicine, 38(4), 388–402.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kearney, A. J., & Murray, M. (2009). Breast cancer screening recommendations: is mammography the only answer? Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 54(5), 393–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopans, D. B. (2010). The 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines are not supported by science: the scientific support for mammography screening. Radiologic Clinics of North America, 48(5), 843–857.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Korde, L. A., Mueller, C. M., Loud, J. T., Struewing, J. P., Nichols, K., Greene, M. H., et al. (2011). No evidence of excess breast cancer risk among mutation-negative women from BRCA mutation-positive families. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 125, 169–173.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner, L., de Vries, H., & Offermans, N. (1997). Participation in a breast cancer screening program: influence of past behavior and determinants on future screening participation. Preventive Medicine, 26(4), 473–482.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, C. D., White, E., Peacock, S., Drucker, M. J., & Urban, N. (1999). Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings. American Journal of Roentgenology, 173(6), 1651–1655.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, I., Dueck, A., Gray, R., Wasif, N., Giurescu, M., Lorans, R., & Pockaj, B. (2012). Clinical and self breast examination remain important in the era of modern screening. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 19(5), 1484–1490.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McCaul, K. D., Branstetter, A. D., Schroeder, D. M., & Glasgow, R. E. (1996). What is the relationship between breast cancer risk and mammography screening? A meta-analytic review. Health psychology: official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, 15(6), 423–429.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McCready, T., Littlewood, D., & Jenkinson, J. (2005). Breast self-examination and breast awareness: a literature review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 14(5), 570–578.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., Saslow, D., & Alciati, M. H. (2004). Performance and reporting of clinical breast examination: a review of the literature. CA: a Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 54(6), 345–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McInerney-Leo, A., Hadley, D., Kase, R. G., Giambarresi, T. R., Struewing, J. P., & Biesecker, B. B. (2006). BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families III: Risk perception and screening. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 140A, 2198–2206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meissner, H. I., Klabunde, C. N., Han, P. K., Benard, V. B., & Breen, N. (2011). Breast cancer screening beliefs, recommendations and practices: primary care physicians in the United States. Cancer, 117(14), 3101–3111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe, K., Lynch, H. T., Ghadirian, P., Tung, N., Olivotto, I., Warner, E., et al. (2004). Contralateral breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22(12), 2328–2335.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milhabet, I., Duprez, C., Krzeminski, A., & Christophe, V. (2012). Cancer risk comparative perception and overscreening behaviors of non-carriers from BRCA1/2 families. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • National Cancer Institute (2008). Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, “SEER” Stat Database: Incidence-SEER 17 Regs Public Use, Linked to County Attributes- Total US, 1969–2006 Counties. http://www.seer.cancer.gov/.

  • National Institute of Health. (1997). Breast cancer screening for women ages 40–49. NIH Consensus Statement, 15, 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nekolla, E. A., Griebel, J., & Brix, G. (2008). Radiation risk associated with mammography screening examinations for women younger than 50 years of age. Zeitschrift für Medizinische Physik, 18(3), 170–179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, H. D., Tyne, K., Naik, A., Bougatsos, C., Chan, B., Nygren, P., et al. (2009). Screening for Breast Cancer: Systematic Evidence Review Update for the US Preventive Services Task Force [Internet]. US Preventive Services Task Force Evidence Syntheses, Report No.: 10-05142-EF-1.

  • O’Neill, S. C., Valdimarsdottir, H. B., DeMarco, T. A., Peshkin, B. N., Graves, K. D., Brown, K., et al. (2010). BRCA1/2 test results impact risk management attitudes, intentions and uptake. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 124(3), 755–764.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, S. (2009). Breast self examination no longer recommended. Nursing New Zealand, 15(2), 12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peshkin, B. N., Schwartz, M. D., Isaacs, C., Hughes, C., Main, D., & Lerman, C. (2002). Utilization of breast cancer screening in a clinically based sample of women after BRCA1/2 testing. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 11, 1115–1118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pilarski, R. (2009). Risk perception among women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counselling, 18, 303–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pivot, X., Eisinger, F., Blay, J. Y., Coscas, Y., Calazel-Benque, A., Viguier, J., et al. (2011). Mammography utilization in women aged 40–49 years: the French EDIFICE survey. European Journal of Cancer Prevention, 20(1), S16–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Sherif, K., Aronson, M., Weiss, K. B., & Owens, D. K. (2007). Screening mammography for women 40 to 49 years of age: A clinical practice guideline from the American college of physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 146, 511–515.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Risch, H. A., McLaughlin, J. R., Cole, D. E., Rosen, B., Bradley, L., Kwan, E., et al. (2001). Prevalence and penetrance of germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in a population series of 649 women with ovarian cancer. American Journal of Human Genetics, 68(3), 700–710.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Risch, H. A., McLaughlin, J. R., Cole, D. E., Rosen, B., Bradley, L., Fan, I., et al. (2006). Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: a kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98(23), 1694–1706.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rogozinska-Szczepka, J., Utracka-Hutka, B., Grzybowska, E., Maka, B., Nowicka, E., Smok-Ragankiewicz, A., et al. (2004). BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations as prognostic factors in bilateral breast cancer patients. Annals of Oncology, 15(9), 1373–1376.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstock, I. M. (1990). The health belief model: Explaining health behavior through expectancies. In K. Glanz, F. M. Lewis, & B. K. Rimer (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 39–62). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosolowich, V. (2006). Breast self-examination. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 28(8), 728–730.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, J. L., Montgomery, G. H., Duberstein, P. R., & Bovbjerg, D. H. (2005). Health locus of control and perceived risk for breast cancer in healthy women. Behavioral Medicine, 31(1), 33–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sabatino, S. A., McCarthy, E. P., Phillips, R. S., & Burns, R. B. (2007). Breast cancer risk assessment and management in primary care: provider attitudes, practices, and barriers. Cancer Detection and Prevention, 31(5), 375–383.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salz, T., Richman, A. R., & Brewer, N. T. (2010). Meta-analyses of the effect of false-positive mammograms on generic and specific psychosocial outcomes. Psycho-Oncology, 19, 1026–1034.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. A. (2000). Breast cancer screening among women younger than age 50: a current assessment of the issues. Canadian Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 50(5), 312–336.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tinley, S. T., Houfek, J., Watson, P., Wenzel, L., Clark, M. B., Coughlin, S., Lynch, H. T., et al. (2004). Screening adherence in BRCA1/2 families is associated with primary physicians’ behavior. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 125A(1), 5–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • US Preventive Services Task Force. (2009). Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(10), 716–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos, J., Oosterwijk, J. C., Gomez-Garcia, E., Menko, F. H., Colle, M. J., van Asperen, C. J., et al. (2012). Exploring the short-term impact of DNA-testing in breast cancer patients: The counselees’ perception matters, but the actual BRCA1/2 result does not. Patient Education and Counseling, 86, 239–251.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Woloshin, S., Schwartz, L. M., Byram, S. J., Sox, H. C., Fischhoff, B., & Welch, H. G. (2000). Women’s understanding of the mammography screening debate. Archives of Internal Medicine, 160, 1434–1440.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yokoe, T., Iino, Y., Maemura, M., Takei, H., Horiguchi, J., Matsumoto, H., et al. (1998). Efficacy of mammography for detecting early breast cancer in women under 50. Anticancer Research, 18(6B), 4709–4711.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the Fondation de France for financing the project, as well as the oncogenetic consultations of the Centre Oscar Lambret and of the Centre François Baclesse for their most valuable help in data-gathering. A big thanks also to the participants who agreed to take part in the study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. URECA EA 1059, Université Lille Nord de France, Université de Lille 3, Villeneuve d’Ascq, France

    Christelle Duprez & Véronique Christophe

  2. LAPCOS EA, Université de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, Nice, France

    Isabelle Milhabet & Aurélie Krzeminski

  3. Département de Sénologie, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France

    Claude Adenis & Philippe Vennin

  4. Equipe multidisciplinaire d’oncogénétique, Centre François Baclesse, Caen, France

    Pascaline Berthet

  5. Laboratoire d’Oncologie Moléculaire Humaine, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France

    Jean-Philippe Peyrat

  6. URECA EA 1059, Domaine Universitaire du pont de Bois, Université de Lille 3, B.P. 60149, 59653, Villeneuve d’Ascq cedex, France

    Christelle Duprez & Véronique Christophe

Authors
  1. Christelle Duprez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Véronique Christophe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabelle Milhabet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aurélie Krzeminski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Claude Adenis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pascaline Berthet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Jean-Philippe Peyrat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Philippe Vennin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Christelle Duprez or Véronique Christophe.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duprez, C., Christophe, V., Milhabet, I. et al. Comparison of the Screening Practices of Unaffected Noncarriers under 40 and between 40 and 49 in BRCA1/2 Families. J Genet Counsel 22, 469–481 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-012-9569-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-012-9569-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation