SynthesisBritish journal of cancer2007
Estimating the referral rate for cancer genetic assessment from a systematic review of the evidence.
Synthesis in British journal of cancer, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What is the quantitative risk of gastric cancer in the first-degree relatives of patients? A meta-analysis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Pooled it
- Glutaminase inhibitor CB-839 increases radiation sensitivity of lung tumor cells and human lung tumor xenografts in mice.International journal of radiation biology · 2019Article
- Risk for Patient Harm in Canadian Genetic Counseling Practice: It's Time to Consider Regulation.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- What hinders minority ethnic access to cancer genetics services and what may help?European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2014Article
- The value of a genetic counselor: improving identification of cancer genetic counseling patients with chart review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
- Could triaging family history of cancer during palliative care enable earlier genetic counseling intervention?Journal of palliative medicine · 2013Article
- Family history and the risk of gastric cancer.British journal of cancer · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To estimate the optimal proportion of new patients diagnosed with cancer who require assessment and evaluation for familial cancer genetic risk, based on the best evidence available. We identified evidence of the patients who require assessment for familial genetic risk when diagnosed with cancer through extensive literature reviews and searches of guidelines. Epidemiological data on the distribution of cancer type, presence of a family history, age and other factors that influence referral for genetic assessment were identified. Decision trees were constructed to merge the evidence-based recommendations with the epidemiological data to calculate the optimal proportion of patients who should be referred. We identified 'high probability' and 'moderate probability' groups for having a genetic susceptibility. The proportion of patients diagnosed with cancer in Australia who have a high probability of having a genetic predisposition and who should be referred for genetic assessment is 1%. If the moderate probability group is also assessed this proportion increases to 6%. This model has identified the proportion of new patients diagnosed with cancer who should be referred for genetic assessment. This data is the first step in determining the resources required for provision of an adequate cancer genetic service.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.