Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16865560›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2006

Predictive testing of eighteen year olds: counseling challenges.

Clara L Gaff, Elly Lynch, Lesley Spencer

Open access · bronzeAbstract readCase Reports
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A framework for youth-friendly genetic counseling.Journal of community genetics · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Ethics in genetic counselling.Journal of community genetics · 2019
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Clara L GaffInstitute of Medical Genetics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. gaffc@cardiff.ac.uk
Elly Lynch
Lesley Spencer
Cardiff University · GBRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic counseling of teenagers is challenging and complex. The ability to think abstractly, a sense of self and independence from family all develop during adolescence. Predictive genetic testing counseling protocols presuppose that these qualities exist, requiring the at-risk individual to consider the short and long term consequences of testing as well as their motivations. Eighteen year olds are in transition from adolescence to adulthood; eligible for predictive genetic testing, they may not yet be independent of their family or able to articulate their feelings. This paper presents case studies from the authors' clinical practice to illustrate some of the difficulties faced by genetic counselors when 18 year olds request predictive testing for Hereditary Non-Polyposis Colorectal Cancer. By reflecting upon their experiences with these young adults and their families, the authors' intention is to generate discussion about genetic counseling strategies, particularly for predictive genetic testing, that are both age-appropriate and family-sensitive.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingAdolescentAge FactorsAustraliaCoercionColorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisDecision MakingFamilyFemaleGenetic Carrier ScreeningGenetic TestingHumansIndividuationInternal-External ControlMaleParent-Child Relations

Identifiers

PMID16865560
OpenAlexW1973699445

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.