Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16941666›Full record

Trial reportAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part C, Seminars in medical genetics2006

The Genetic Counseling Video Project (GCVP): models of practice.

D Roter, L Ellington, L Hamby Erby, S Larson, W Dudley

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in American journal of medical genetics. Part C, Seminars in medical genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

D RoterDepartment of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. droter@jhsph.edu
L Ellington
L Hamby Erby
S Larson
W Dudley

Funding

Genetic Counseling Processes and Analogue Client OutcomeR01HG002688 · NHGRI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI ROTER, DEBRA L · 2003 to 2006
$2.3M
NHGRI NIH HHS 1R01 HG 002688-01A1NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG002688
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic counseling is conceptualized as having both "teaching" and "counseling" functions; however, little is known about how these functions are articulated in routine practice. This study addresses the question by documenting, on videotape, the practices of a national sample of prenatal and cancer genetic counselors (GCs) providing routine pre-test counseling to simulated clients (SCs). One hundred and seventy-seven GCs recruited at two annual conferences of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) were randomly assigned to counsel one of six female SCs of varying ethnicity, with or without a spouse, in their specialty. One hundred and fifty-two videotapes were coded with the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) and both GCs and SCs completed evaluative questionnaires. Two teaching and two counseling patterns of practice emerged from cluster analysis. The teaching patterns included: (1) clinical teaching (31%) characterized by low psychosocial, emotional and facilitative talk, high levels of clinical exchange, and high verbal dominance; and (2) psycho-educational teaching (27%) characterized by high levels of both clinical and psychosocial exchange, low levels of emotional and facilitative talk, and higher verbal dominance. The counseling patterns included: (1) supportive counseling (33%) characterized by low psychosocial and clinical exchange, high levels of emotional and facilitative talk, and low verbal dominance; and (2) psychosocial counseling (9%) with high emotional and facilitative talk, low clinical and high psychosocial exchange, and the lowest verbal dominance. SCs ratings of satisfaction with communication, the counselor's affective demeanor, and the counselor's use of non-verbal skills were highest for the counseling model sessions. Both the teaching and counseling models seem to be represented in routine practice and predict variation in client satisfaction, affective demeanor, and nonverbal effectiveness.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalVideotape RecordingAdultAgedCommunicationCounselingFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansMaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CarePatient Education as TopicPatient SatisfactionPatient SimulationPilot Projects

Identifiers

PMID16941666
PMCPMC2766799

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.