ArticleFamilial cancer2006
Determinants of preferences for genetic counselling in Jewish women.
Article in Familial cancer, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of a genetic counseling model on mothers of children with down syndrome: a Brazilian pilot study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
- Focusing on patient needs and preferences may improve genetic counseling for colorectal cancer.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
- BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in the Breast Cancer Family Registry: an open resource for collaborative research.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2009Article
- Measuring, and identifying predictors of women's perceptions of three types of breast cancer risk: population risk, absolute risk and comparative risk.British journal of cancer · 2009Article
- A discrete choice experiment of preferences for genetic counselling among Jewish women seeking cancer genetics services.British journal of cancer · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPatient preferences are central to the economic appraisal of health services. Cancer genetic services are relatively new, and little is known about clients' preferences. We sought to determine clients' preferences for genetic service delivery, and to identify factors that predict those preferences.
methodsWe studied female participants in the Australian Jewish Breast Cancer Study who were offered a test for ancestral mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Questionnaires, asking respondents to rank their preferences for functions, or attributes, of genetic counselling were received from 256 women (76% response rate).
resultsSixty-two per cent of the respondents gave their highest preference for information on cancer and genetic risk; 19% gave it to breast and ovarian cancer surveillance; 14% gave it to preparation for testing; and, 5% gave it to direction with decision making. Most ranked direction as their least preferred attribute (53%). Women with a strong cancer family history were less likely to give highest preference to information (52%) and more likely to give highest preference to preparation for testing (22%) (P=0.04; 0.01, respectively). Women with a university degree were less likely to give highest preference to surveillance (15%) (P=0.04).
conclusionMost women offered testing had highest preference for information and lowest preference for direction. We have identified factors that predict highest preference for information, preparation, and surveillance attributes. Understanding preferences and their predictors may assist cancer genetic services to provide clients with greater benefits from counselling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
16736286What 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.