Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17295057›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2007

Bayesian risk assessment in genetic testing for autosomal dominant disorders with age-dependent penetrance.

Shuji Ogino, Robert B Wilson, Bert Gold, Pamela Flodman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Shuji OginoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA. shuji_ogino@dfci.harvard.edu
Robert B Wilson
Bert Gold
Pamela Flodman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk assessment is an essential component of genetic counseling and testing, and the accuracy of risk assessment is critical for decision making by consultands. However, it has been shown that genetic risk calculations may have high error rates in practice. Risk calculations for autosomal dominant disorders are frequently complicated by age-dependent penetrance and sensitivities of less than 100% in genetic testing. We provide methods of risk calculation for prototypical pedigrees of a family at risk for an autosomal dominant disorder with age-dependent penetrance. Our risk calculations include scenarios in which the sensitivity of genetic testing is less than 100%, and in which the sensitivity of genetic testing varies for different family members at risk. Our Bayesian methods permit autosomal dominant disease probabilities to be calculated accurately, taking into account all relevant information. Our methods are particularly useful for hereditary cancer syndromes, in which genetic testing can seldom achieve 100% sensitivity. Our methods can be applied to many different scenarios, including those where the sensitivity of genetic testing varies for different family members at risk.

Indexed as

Age of OnsetBayes TheoremGenes, DominantGenetic TestingFemaleGenetic Diseases, InbornHumansMaleMutationPedigreeProbabilityRisk Assessment

Identifiers

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.