SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Extended search

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Earp Brian D.) srt2:(2021)"

Search: WFRF:(Earp Brian D.) > (2021)

  • Result 1-2 of 2
Sort/group result
   
EnumerationReferenceCoverFind
1.
  • Kapoor, Pooja Middha, et al. (author)
  • Combined associations of a polygenic risk score and classical risk factors with breast cancer risk
  • 2021
  • In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0027-8874 .- 1460-2105. ; 113:3, s. 329-337
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • We evaluated the joint associations between a new 313-variant PRS (PRS313) and questionnaire-based breast cancer risk factors for women of European ancestry, using 72 284 cases and 80 354 controls from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Interactions were evaluated using standard logistic regression and a newly developed case-only method for breast cancer risk overall and by estrogen receptor status. After accounting for multiple testing, we did not find evidence that per-standard deviation PRS313 odds ratio differed across strata defined by individual risk factors. Goodness-of-fit tests did not reject the assumption of a multiplicative model between PRS313 and each risk factor. Variation in projected absolute lifetime risk of breast cancer associated with classical risk factors was greater for women with higher genetic risk (PRS313 and family history) and, on average, 17.5% higher in the highest vs lowest deciles of genetic risk. These findings have implications for risk prevention for women at increased risk of breast cancer. 
  •  
2.
  • Earp, Brian D, et al. (author)
  • Current critiques of the WHO policy on female genital mutilation
  • 2021
  • In: International journal of impotence research. - : Nature Publishing Group. - 0955-9930 .- 1476-5489. ; 33, s. 196-209
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
    • In recent years, the dominant Western discourse on "female genital mutilation" (FGM) has increasingly been challenged by scholars. Numerous researchers contest both the terminology used and the empirical claims made in what has come to be called "the standard tale" of FGM (also termed "female genital cutting" [FGC]). The World Health Organization (WHO), a major player in setting the global agenda on this issue, maintains that all medically unnecessary cutting of the external female genitalia, no matter how slight, should be banned as torture and a violation of the human right to bodily integrity. However, the WHO targets only non-Western forms of female-only genital cutting, raising concerns about gender bias and cultural imperialism. Here, we summarize ongoing critiques of the WHO's terminology, ethicolegal assumptions, and empirical claims, including the claim that non-Western FGC as such constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. To this end, we highlight recent comparative studies of medically unnecessary genital cutting of all types, including those affecting adult women and teenagers in Western societies, individuals with differences of sex development (DSD), transgender persons, and males. In so doing, we attempt to clarify the grounds for a growing critical consensus that current anti-FGM laws and policies may be ethically incoherent, empirically unsupportable, and legally unsustainable.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Result 1-2 of 2

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view