Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15604634›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2004

The decision to test in women receiving genetic counseling for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

Kimberly Kelly, Howard Leventhal, Michael Andrykowski, Deborah Toppmeyer, Judie Much, James Dermody, Monica Marvin, Jill Baran, Marvin Schwalb

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Cervical cancer worry and screening among appalachian women.The journal of primary prevention · 2015
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Kimberly KellyDepartment of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40536-0086, USA. kmkell2@uky.edu
Howard Leventhal
Michael Andrykowski
Deborah Toppmeyer
Judie Much
James Dermody
Monica Marvin
Jill Baran
Marvin Schwalb
Rutgers Cancer Institute of New JerseyRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Kentucky · USCorewell Health Blodgett Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functions of genetic counseling include provision of risk information and provision of support in an effort to assist with decision making. This study examines (1) the relationship among intentions to test, self-reported provision of blood sample, and receipt of test results; (2) the impact of genetic counseling on distress specific to gene status, perceived risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer in the context having BRCA1/2 mutations (mutations predisposing to increased risk of breast-ovarian cancer), and perceived risk factors for breast cancer; and (3) the clinical profile of those receiving/not receiving results. Intentions to test for BRCA1/2 mutations, self-reported provision of blood sample immediately after counseling, and receipt of test results were statistically different but highly correlated, and intentions to test increased from pre- to postcounseling. A repeated measures ANOVA found distress specific to gene status and perceived risk factors decreased from pre- to postcounseling. Further, two clinical profiles of consultands emerged: (1) those receiving results with change in intentions to test having lower levels of distress and (2) those not receiving results and those receiving results with no change in intentions to test with higher levels of distress. Our findings are consistent with the function of genetic counseling-to provide information and support to those with familial cancer, as well as to assist in decision making. The provision of support is important as distress specific to gene status may impede flexible decision making about genetic testing.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthGenes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2Genetic CounselingGenetic TestingReligion and MedicineAdaptation, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansJewsMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID15604634
OpenAlexW2107845133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.