Trial reportThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2001
Evaluation of the impact of two educational interventions on GP management of familial breast/ovarian cancer cases: a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- What is the effectiveness of printed educational materials on primary care physician knowledge, behaviour, and patient outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses.Implementation science : IS · 2015Pooled it
- Referral interventions from primary to specialist care: a systematic review of international evidence.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Pooled it
- Cancer genetic risk assessment for individuals at risk of familial breast cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Standards for reporting randomized controlled trials in medical informatics: a systematic review of CONSORT adherence in RCTs on clinical decision support.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIAPooled it
- Study protocol: a cluster randomized controlled trial of web-based decision support tools for increasing BRCA1/2 genetic counseling referral in primary care.BMC health services research · 2018Trial
- A primary care specialist genetics service: a cluster-randomised factorial trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2012Trial
- The GRAIDS Trial: a cluster randomised controlled trial of computer decision support for the management of familial cancer risk in primary care.British journal of cancer · 2007Trial
- Familial breast cancer: management of 'lower risk' referrals.British journal of cancer · 2006Trial
- Cluster randomised controlled trial of an educational outreach visit to improve influenza and pneumococcal immunisation rates in primary care.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002Trial
- Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary healthcare practitioners in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review on genetics.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- A practical method for integrating community priorities in planning and implementing cancer control programs.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2023Article
- Role of the general practitioner in the care of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: General practitioner and patient perspectives.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2018Observational
- What works in genomics education: outcomes of an evidenced-based instructional model for community-based physicians.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
- Identification of familial clustering for cancer through the family health strategy program in the municipality of Angra dos Reis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.Journal of community genetics · 2015Article
- Efficacy of an educational intervention on family physicians' risk assessment and management of colorectal cancer.Journal of community genetics · 2014Article
- Assessing the effectiveness of a Grand Rounds CME activity for health-care professionals.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2013Article
- Delivering pharmacogenetic testing in a primary care setting.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2013Article
- Genetic education for primary care providers: improving attitudes, knowledge, and confidence.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadien · 2009Article
- Interactive genetic counseling role-play: a novel educational strategy for family physicians.Journal of genetic counseling · 2008Article
- Missed opportunities: family history and behavioral risk factors in breast cancer risk assessment among a multiethnic group of women.Journal of general internal medicine · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt has been suggested that primary care should become more involved in providing genetic services, such as basic risk assessment, to enable patients with a moderate/high risk to be referred and those with a low risk to receive reassurance and advice from their general practitioner (GP). However, GPs currently lack knowledge and confidence in this area.
aimTo investigate the effect of an in-practice educational session and information pack on GP management of familial breast/ovarian cancer cases. DESIGN OF STUDY: Cluster randomised controlled trial.
settingGP principals in 170 practices in Oxfordshire and Northamptonshire. Of the 688 GPs, 426 (62%) participated.
methodPractices were randomised either to Group A (receiving an inpractice educational session plus information pack), Group B (receiving an information pack alone), or Group C (receiving neither an educational session nor a pack). The main study outcome was the proportion of GPs making the correct referral decision on at least five out of six family history vignettes. A secondary outcome was GPs' reported confidence in managing patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer, measured by a score that was generated by combining responses to four questions.
resultsThere was a 40% (95% CI = 30-50%, P < 0.001) improvement in the proportion of GPs who made the correct referral decision on at least five out of the six vignettes in Group A (111/140 [79%]) compared with Group C (controls) (63/162 [39%]), and a 42% (95% CI = 31-52%, P < 0.001) improvement in Group B (100/124 [81%]) compared with the control group. There was a trend in reported confidence in the management of individuals with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer from a mean confidence score of 2.3 in Group A to 2.0 in Group B and 1.5 in Group C (P < 0.001).
conclusionProviding GPs with an information pack significantly improved referral decisions regarding patients with a family history of breast/ovarian cancer. Although extremely well received, an in-house educational session produced no additional improvements. There were, however, greater levels of reported confidence in the group who received the educational session in addition to the information pack.
Indexed as
Identifiers
11677705PMC1314127W2161176280What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.