Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Original article / research
Full Version
Breast Self-examination Practice among Medical Postgraduate Female Students of Southern Odisha: A Cross-sectional Study
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Priyasha Panda,
PG Ladies Hostel-5, M.K.C.G. Ladies Hostel Road, M.K.C.G. Medical College,
Berhampur-760004, Odisha, India.
E-mail: priyashapanda123@gmail.com
Introduction: Breast cancer is on the rise among females in India. Breast Self-Examination (BSE) is an easy to learn, self-monitoring screening modality which can be done in utmost privacy. A proportionate increase in incidence of breast cancer is now reported among urban educated females. Even doctors neglect their own health and are the at-risk population for Non Communicable Diseases (NCDs).
Aim: To assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of postgraduates on BSE.
Materials and Methods: This was a web-based cross-sectional analytical study conducted between August 2021-October 2021 at M.K.C.G. Medical College, Berhampur, Odisha, India. Study population included 100 female postgraduate students. A predesigned structured questionnaire was prepared by thorough review of literature and was validated by experts. Data was collected on knowledge, attitude and practice of BSE from the study participants using Google form. Scoring was done and correlation was found out between the parameters. Chi-square test and the Fischers-exact test was used for statistical analysis.
Results: About 82 respondents completed the form. About 66 (80.48%) were in age group of 25-29 years, 7 (8.53%) had family history of breast cancer, 8 (9.75%) had discovered abnormality while practicing BSE. The median scores in knowledge of breast cancer and BSE was 36 and 17 respectively. The median scores of attitude and practice were 42 and 13 each. Spearman’s rank correlation between knowledge and attitude was positively correlated (r=0.324, p=0.003), attitude and practice was positively correlated (r=0.317, p=0.004) and knowledge and practice was not correlated (r=0.173, p=0.120). No significant difference in practice was found for participants with family history of breast cancer (p=0.353) and personal history of breast abnormality (p=0.672) and those who had no history. However a significant association was found between knowledge on frequency of BSE and monthly practice of BSE (p=0.003).
Conclusion: In this study 50% of the participants did not know about the age of starting BSE as 20 years. All the steps were not followed by those who performed BSE. The most common reason for not practicing BSE was lack of time. Knowledge-practice gaps exist among the future professionals.
Breast cancer, Early detection of cancer, Non communicable diseases, Professional practice gaps
The NCDs account for 63% of all deaths in India (1). The number of deaths due to cancer is also increasing now-a-days. Breast cancer is the most common cancer among females in India. It is the most frequent cancer to be diagnosed in women with age standardised incidence rate of 25.8 per 1 lakh population and age standardised mortality rate of 13.3 per 1 lakh population in India (2). The risk of breast cancer in woman is 0.4%, 1.5%, 2.4% and 3.6% between 30-40 years, 40-50 years, 50-60 and 60-70 years respectively (3).
Screening remains the most crucial step for early detection and diagnosis of breast cancer. Screening modalities like regular BSE, Clinical Breast Examination (CBE), mammography and ultrasound play a very important role in early detection of breast cancer and thereby reducing mortality. BSE is an easy to learn, quick, non invasive self-monitoring technique which can be done in utmost privacy unlike clinical examination which requires hospital visit and specialist consultation. Mammography and ultrasound are quite expensive. BSE helps women to be familiar with their breast and is helpful in detecting any abnormal changes at the earliest (4).
There is a rise in the number of patients diagnosed with breast cancer at young age (3). A proportionate increase in incidence of breast cancer is now reported among urban educated females. This could be because of late marriage, late first child birth, lesser number of children and relatively shorter periods of breastfeeding among urban educated women (2). As the risk factors are accumulating, breast cancer incidence may continue to rise in the coming years. BSE can be a very effective tool for early detection of cancer. However, it is not frequently practiced or has been practiced incorrectly for several reasons (5). The practice of BSE among the female medical students was found to be very low (23%) (6). The practice of BSE in India, varies from 0-52% (7).
There are no studies on BSE practice among medicos in Southern Odisha, India. As doctors, they are aware about BSE, but still they are found to neglect their own health. Therefore, this study was done among postgraduate female doctors to assess their knowledge, attitude and practice of BSE, to find out the correlation between knowledge, attitude and practice and to determine any association between BSE practice with family history of breast cancer and personal history of breast abnormality.
It was a web-based cross-sectional analytical study conducted between August 2021 to October 2021 at M.K.C.G. Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur, Odisha, India. Ethical clearance was obtained from Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC) (Review Board Approval Number 848). The study population included all female postgraduate students from various departments of the institution. There were 100 female postgraduate students during the study period at the institution.
Inclusion criteria: All female postgraduate students from various departments of the institution who gave consent and filled the form completely were included in the study.
Exclusion criteria: Those who did not fill up the form were excluded from the study.
Sample size calculation: Non probability purposive sampling method was applied.
The participants were explained briefly about the purpose and importance of the study over mobile phone calls. They were also informed that their individual particulars would be kept totally confidential and anonymous.
Study Procedure
A predesigned structured questionnaire was developed by thorough review of literature [4,5,8-12] and was validated by public health experts. The questionnaire had five sections [Annexure-1]: socio-demographic and general information, knowledge of breast cancer, knowledge on BSE, attitude on BSE, practice of BSE. The questionnaire comprised of 49 questions on knowledge, attitude and practice; 20 on knowledge of breast cancer, 11 on knowledge of BSE, nine on attitude, and nine on practice. A score of “2” was used for correct responses, “1” for don’t know, and “0” for incorrect response in assessment of knowledge. The total maximum score for knowledge of breast cancer was 40 and for knowledge on BSE was 22. A 5-point Likert scale (Strongly agree/Agree/Neutral/Disagree/Strongly disagree) with scores of “5,” “4,” “3,” “2,” and “1” respectively was used for assessing attitude. The total maximum score for attitude was 45. A score of “2” for correct practice and “0” for no practice was used to assess practice among study participants. The total maximum score for practice was 18. Those participants who scored more than 50th percentile were considered to have good knowledge, attitude and practice. Google form was used as data collection tool for the study. The link of the questionnaire was sent to all the participants through Whatsapp Application. Data were collected anonymously from the participants. A total of 82 participants filled the form completely.
Statistical Analysis
The collected data was compiled, formatted, and analysed using requisite statistical tests/software like Microsoft Excel and IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) statistics 2021. Median scores were calculated for each of the parameters. Data was analysed using frequencies and percentages. Chi-square test was used to test the association taking α=5% and at 95% Confidence Interval. Fischers-exact test was used when the cell value was less than 5. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient (rho) test was used to see correlation between knowledge, attitude and practice.
The google form questionnaire link was sent to all the female postgraduate students. Out of 100, 82 participants filled up the form as required. The mean age of the participants was 30.4±3.41 years. Majority that is 66 (80.48%) participants were in the age group of 25-29 years, 45 (54.87%) of them were married, 80 (97.56%) belonged to urban areas and 74 (90.24%) were Hindus. About 48 (58.54%) were in second year and 34 (41.46%) were in first year (during the study period only two batches were present).Family history of breast cancer was there in 7 (8.53%) participants; most frequently affected relative being aunt. Some abnormality in the breast was detected among 8 (9.75%) participants who were practicing BSE. Most common source of information for participants was from books 82 (100%) and lectures 73 (89.02%) followed by hospital 69 (84.14%), media 55 (67.07%) and friends 51 (62.19%). The most common source of motivation for postgraduates was advise from health personnel 53 (64.63%) followed by family history of breast cancer 11 (13.41%), internet 7 (8.53%), family 2 (2.43%) and peer 1 (1.21%). Some other sources of motivation as stated by them was the increasing number of cases of breast cancer and “risk of cancer in women”. About 54 (65.85%) students had tried convincing their friends and family members and 61 (74.39%) had advised patients to perform BSE.
Most of the participants, 75 (91.46%) knew that breast cancer is curable and 81 (98.78%) knew that Cancer Breast could occur 11even without a family history. About 78 (95.12%) were aware about the possibility of having cancer in the other breast if she had cancer in one breast, however 2 (2.43%) didn’t know about it. All knew that presence of skin irritation and dimpling was a symptom of cancer. However only 10 (12.20%) opined that a painful soft lump with smooth edge could be cancer. More than 80% of the participants were well aware of the risk factors for breast cancer. However 17 (20.73%) didn’t know that intake of alcohol could be a risk factor for breast cancer. All the participants knew that cancer of the breast could be detected by BSE, clinical examination or by mammography (Table/Fig 1).
All the participants stated that BSE was useful for early detection of cancer and about 81 (98.78%) stated that it was recommended for all women. Less than 50% participants knew that BSE can be done during pregnancy and lactation. The correct method of palpation was known to all. The benefits of BSE as opined by the respondents were early detection of cancer 65 (79.26%) and detection of abnormal breast changes 68 (82.92%) (Table/Fig 2).
Regarding frequency of BSE, 44 (53.65%) knew that it should be done monthly. The fact that BSE is done a week after period was known to 60 (73.17%) participants. However 22 (26.83%) didn’t know about the best time for doing BSE. Out of the 82 participants, 41 (50%) knew that BSE should be started from 20 years of age, 22 (26.82%) from 30 years and 19 (23.17%) from puberty.
Although more than 50% of participants had good attitude towards practice of BSE, only about 60 (73.17%) strongly agreed that they should go for medical consultation in case of any abnormality on BSE (Table/Fig 3).
The BSE was practiced by 62 (75.61%) participants and out of them 19 (23.17%) did it monthly. It was performed in front of the mirror by 44 (53.66%) students. About 27 (32.93%) practiced BSE by lying down and 67 (81.71%) in standing/sitting position (Table/Fig 4). Out of those who did not practice BSE, the most common reason for not practicing was lack of time 9 (45%) followed by absence of signs and symptoms 7 (35%). About 2 (10%) said it is because of lack of knowledge and forgetfulness.
Median scores of knowledge on breast cancer and BSE, attitude on BSE and practice on BSE were 54, 42 and 13, respectively (Table/Fig 5).
Proportion of individuals with knowledge on breast cancer, attitude and practice scores >50th percentile were 43.9%, 37.8% and 45.1%, respectively (Table/Fig 6).
A positive correlation was found between knowledge and attitude, and also between attitude and practice of BSE (Table/Fig 7).
No significant association was found between family history of breast cancer and practice of BSE (p=0.353) and between abnormality detected during BSE earlier and practice of BSE (p=0.672) (Table/Fig 8).
A significant association was found between knowledge on frequency of BSE and monthly (regular) practice of BSE (p=0.003) (Table/Fig 9).
The BSE is a cost effective screening method for early detection of cancer of the breast especially in developing countries like India (13),(14). The present study was conducted to assess the knowledge, attitude and practice of BSE among postgraduate medical students. Majority of the participants were in the age group of 25-29 years. The right age to start BSE is 20 years (15). As medical professionals they can play a major role in spreading awareness about BSE in the community.
In present study, the source of information for the participants was mostly from books and lectures. This finding was similar to a study of breast cancer awareness among nursing students where the most common source of information was books (52%) (16). This finding was also comparable to a study conducted by Joy N et al., among undergraduate medical students at Mangalore, India where the source of information was lecture for majority of the participants (10).The median score on knowledge of breast cancer in this study was 36 (total score on breast cancer knowledge=40) and 36 (43.9%) of participants scored more than 50th percentile. As the study participants were medical students, they should be aware of the risk factors, signs and symptoms of breast cancer. The median score of knowledge on BSE was 17 (total score=22) and 40 (48.8%) of participants scored more than 50th percentile. Around 50% of the participants were aware that the age of starting BSE was 20 years. The fact that BSE could be done during pregnancy and lactation was known to 36 (43.90%) of the participants. The fact that a slippery and wet skin during bath facilitates BSE was known to 25 (30.49%) participants in present study whereas it was 43.3% in a study among undergraduates in Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, India (4). Only 44 (53.65%) participants were aware that BSE should be done monthly. This result was comparable to a study conducted among undergraduates in Telangana, Andhra Pradesh India, (50.9%) (4). The frequency of BSE was 69.47% in a study among undergraduates in Mangalore, India (10) and 24% among health professionals at Maharashtra, Nagpur (17).
The best time to do BSE is a week after period was known to majority of the participants. However, it was known to only 36.7% of the nursing staff at Bangalore (18).
Though the participants had good knowledge on BSE, they were not completely aware about certain aspects of BSE inspite of being medical students.
The median score on attitude was 42 (total score=45) and about 31 (37.8%) of participants had scored more than 50th percentile. A study conducted among IT professionals showed 68% to be having poor attitude with mean score of 27.07±8.14 (5). The attitude among postgraduates medical students in this study was better than Indian dental students as observed by Doshi D et al., (7). The junior doctors should be aware about the increasing trend of breast cancer cases.
The median score on practice was 13 (total score=18) and about 37 (45.1%) of participants scored more than the 50th percentile. Similar findings were observed in group of Indian dental students (mean score=12.64±5.92) (7) and IT students (mean score=19.11±5.08) (5). In the present study, about 45.1% of the participants were doing good practicing of BSE. This was in contrast to the findings in a study conducted among health professionals at Nagpur, Maharashtra (76%) (17), staff nurses at Bangalore, India (75.6%) (18) and among physiotherapy students at Navi Mumbai (11). In most of the studies about one-fourth of healthcare staffs did not practice BSE. Out of the 62 participants who practiced BSE, only 19 (23.17%) did it regularly, that is once a month. A study conducted among health professionals at Nagpur, Maharashtra also showed similar results (17). This was also comparable to a study conducted among physiotherapy students where 25.8% of them practiced BSE regularly (11). In a study conducted among female health workers in Ethiopia, the magnitude of regular breast self-examination practice was 32.6% (14) and at Ghana only 8.1% of the students performed BSE monthly as recommended (19). Monthly practice of BSE among nurses in Ethiopia was 16.4% (20). In a study among nurses and physicians at Turkey, 15% nurses and 34% physicians practiced BSE regularly every month (21). Likewise, in a study by Haji-Mahmoodi M et al., it was stated that most healthcare practitioners (63-72%) did not practice BSE and only 6% of them performed it monthly (22). All these results suggest that even though the participants had good knowledge and attitude, they were not practicing it regularly and correctly.
The main reason for not practicing BSE in present study was lack of time and absence of any sign/symptom. This finding was similar to a study by Kawalkar AN and Koparkar AR (17) and Ansari S et al., (50%) (18). The practice of doing BSE regularly and correctly can be imbibed in the study participants by conducting sensitisation campaigns regularly.
A positive correlation was found between knowledge of BSE and attitude (r=0.324, p=0.003) and between attitude and practice of BSE (r=0.317, p=0.004). This suggests that doctors were well aware of breast cancer and BSE and are ready to follow recommendations, and any well-designed health intervention like annual campaigns for sensitisation on BSE, will be well accepted. A positive correlation (r=0.176; p=0.001) between knowledge and attitude was also found in a study by Parle J and Gupta S among physiotherapy students (11). Knowledge and practice was positively correlated in studies by Kalliguddi S et al, and Doshi D et al., (5),(6),(7).
No significant difference was found between practice of BSE and presence of family history of breast cancer (p=0.353). The reason for not practicing BSE may be lack of time as stated by the respondents. Similar findings were found in a study among physicians and nurses in Turkey (21). This finding was in contrast to a study in Ethiopia where family history of breast cancer was significantly associated with BSE practice (AOR=5.1 95% CI (2.33, 8.14)) (20).
The knowledge of frequency of BSE and practice was found to be significantly associated (p=0.003). This suggests that the participants are strongly motivated. A strong association (χ2=119.063, p=0.0001) was found between knowledge of BSE and regular practice of BSE in a study by Parle J and Gupta S (11). Comparison of similar studies has been given in (Table/Fig 10) (4),(5),(7),(10),(11),(14),(16),(17),(18),(20),(21),(22).
Limitation(s)
This sample was limited to postgraduate medical students and was skewed highly towards urban educated well to do females and thus cannot be generalised to general population. It was a cross-sectional survey with no follow-up. Hence, high chances of “recall or memory bias” and “selection bias” were there in the study. There is a possibility of “social desirability bias” as the practices were not observed but self-reported. As there was no internationally recognised standardised tool to assess BSE, the questionnaire formation was solely dependent on literature review. This might have resulted in variation of measurements. It also limits comparison of the study findings with other studies. Use of mixed methodology could have strengthened the findings of this study.
The knowledge about breast cancer, its risk factors and BSE among the postgraduate students was not adequate. All the participants knew that BSE was very useful for early detection of breast cancer but about 50% did not know about the age of starting BSE as 20 years and 76.83% did not know that it should be done monthly. Only about 23.2% practiced BSE monthly. About one fourth of the total participants were not practicing BSE and the most common reason was lack of time. Knowledge-practice gaps also exist among the future doctors. This study can be done taking all the female medical students of the state for generating a robust evidence. Breast self-examination training sessions and sensitisation campaigns can be done annually at medical colleges for removing barriers in practice from an early age. Follow-up studies can be planned after training sessions and sensitisation campaigns to emphasise the importance of BSE among medicos.
Authors are grateful to all the participants who participated in this study
1 Accessed WHO: World Health Statistics 2019: Monitoring Health for the SDGs. Geneva, Switzerland, World Health Organization. ate: Jan 3, 2022]. 2 Park K 26 th edition. Preventive and social medicine. Chapter 6 Page 429. updated Internet 3 Healthline. Everything you should know about breast cancer in your 20s and 30s. US. Jacquelyn Cafasso ctober 5 2021]. Available from: https://www.healthline.com/health/breast-cancer/breast-cancer-20s-30s. 4 Reddy SB, Acharya JP. Cross-sectional study on knowledge about breast cancer and breast self examination among female undergraduate students in Telangana, India. J Med Res. 2020;6(6):291-94. [crossref] 5 Kalliguddi S, Sharma S, Gore CA. Knowledge, attitude, and practice of breast self-examination amongst female IT professionals in Silicon Valley of India. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019;8(2):568. [crossref] [PubMed] 6 Ameer K, Abdulie SM, Pal SK, Arebo K, Kassa GG. Breast cancer awareness and practice of breast self-examination among female medical students in Haramaya University, Harar, Ethiopia. IJIMS. 2014;2(2):109-09. 7 Doshi D, Reddy BS, Kulkarni S, Karunakar P. Breast self-examination: Knowledge, attitude, and practice among female dental students in Hyderabad city, India. Indian J Palliat Care. 2012;18(1):68-73. [crossref] [PubMed] 8 Madubogwu CI, Egwuonwu AO, Madubogwu NU, Njelita IA. Breast cancer screening practices amongst female tertiary health worker in Nnewi. J Can Res Therapeutics. 2017;13(2):274-75. [crossref] [PubMed] 9 Module for Multi-Purpose Workers (MPW)-Female/Male on Prevention, Screening and Control of Common Non-Communicable Diseases Annexure 5. Date accessed: Jan 3, 2022. 10 Joy N, D’Souza C, D’Souza CR. Breast cancer awareness among undergraduate medical students in a tertiary healthcare centre in Mangalore, India. Int Sur J. 2018;5(12):3842-46. [crossref] 11 Parle J, Gupta S. Breast cancer knowledge, attitude and self-examination practices of physiotherapy students in India: A cross-sectional study. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2020;7:3585-93. [crossref] 12 Nandimath PT, Rao NSN, Ansari S. Knowledge and practice of breast self- examination among nursing staff in Bangalore. Indian J Forensic Community Med. 2021;7(4):176-82. [crossref] 13 Bakthavatchalam A, Govindarajan PK, Felix JW. Level of knowledge regarding breast cancer and breast self-examination among working women in Tamil Nadu. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2019;6(10):4243-47. [crossref] 14 Shallo SA, Boru JD. Breast self-examination practice and associated factors among female healthcare workers in West Shoa Zone, Western Ethiopia 2019: A cross-sectional study. BMC Research Notes. 2019;12(1):01-06. [crossref] [PubMed] 15 Lera T, Beyene A, Bekele B, Abreha S. Breast self-examination and associated factors among women in Wolaita Sodo, Ethiopia: A community-based cross-sectional study. BMC Women’s Health. 2020;20(1):167. [crossref] [PubMed] 16 Tansushree B, Magendran J. A study on awareness of breast cancer among nursing students. J Forens Med Toxicol. 2020;14(2):152-57. 17 Kawalkar AN, Koparkar AR. Are health professionals serious about breast self- examination? A study from a medical college and tertiary level hospital of Central India. Int J Res Med Sci. 2017;5:3701-07. [crossref] 18 Ansari S, Nandimath PT, Rao NS. Knowledge and practice of breast self- examination among nursing staff in Bangalore. Indian J Forensic Community Med. 2020;7(4):176-82. [crossref] 19 Fondjo LA, Owusu-Afriyie O, Sakyi SA, Wiafe AA, Amankwaa B, Acheampong E, et al. Comparative assessment of knowledge, attitudes, and practice of breast self-examination among female secondary and tertiary school students in Ghana. Int J Breast Cancer. 2018;2018:7502047. [crossref] [PubMed] 20 Jemebere W. Practice of breast self-examination and associated factors among female nurses of Hawassa university comprehensive specialized hospital, South Ethiopia in 2018. Int J Caring Sci. 2019;12(3):1457-66. 21 Cavdar I, Akyoclu N, Ozbas A, Oztekin D, Ayoglu T, Akyuz N. Determining female physicians’ and nurses’ practices and attitudes toward breast self-examination in Istanbul, Turkey. Oncol Nurs Forum. 2007;34(6):1218-21. [crossref] [PubMed] 22 Haji-Mahmoodi M, Montazeri A, Jarvandi S, Ebrahimi M, Haghighat S, Harirchi I. Breast self-examination: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices among female health care workers in Tehran, Iran. Breast J. 2002;8(4):222-25. [crossref] [PubMed]
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/54845.16597
Date of Submission: Jan 09, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Feb 01, 2022
Date of Acceptance: May 09, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jul 01, 2022
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 13, 2022
• Manual Googling: May 09, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Jun 14, 2022 (20%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com