Trial reportJournal of genetic counseling2007
Cancer family history reporting: impact of method and psychosocial factors.
Trial report 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 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Relationship Between Cancer Cognition, Coping Ability and Behavioral Intention of Secondary Cancer Prevention Among Rural Residents in Shandong Province.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Understanding the Process of Family Cancer History Collection and Health Information Seeking.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2023Article
- What characterizes cancer family history collection tools? A critical literature review.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Review
- Predictors of Self-Reported Family Health History of Breast Cancer.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2016Article
- Self-reported cancer family history is a useful tool for identification of individuals at risk of hereditary cancer predisposition syndrome at primary care centers in middle-income settings: a longitudinal study.Genetics and molecular biology · 2016Article
- Evaluation of the Families SHARE workbook: an educational tool outlining disease risk and healthy guidelines to reduce risk of heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer and colorectal cancer.BMC public health · 2015Article
- Monitoring style of coping with cancer related threats: a review of the literature.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2014Review
- Cancer family history triage: a key step in the decision to offer screening and genetic testing.Familial cancer · 2013Article
- The role of religious and existential well-being in families with Lynch syndrome: prevention, family communication, and psychosocial adjustment.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
- Factors Associated With Cancer Family History Communication Between African American Men and Their Relatives.The Journal of men's studies · 2013Article
- Family history of colorectal cancer: clinicians' preventive recommendations and patient behavior.Preventing chronic disease · 2012Article
- Cancer recurrence worry, risk perception, and informational-coping styles among Appalachian cancer survivors.Journal of psychosocial oncology · 2011Article
- Consistency of self-reported first-degree family history of cancer in a population-based study.Familial cancer · 2009Article
- Cancer risk assessment by rural and Appalachian family medicine physicians.The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Family history is one the greatest risk factors for disease and one of the most important informational tools in medical genetics for the purpose of diagnosis, risk assessment, prevention and treatment. However, research is needed on the comparability of different methods of cancer family history assessment and the influence of psychosocial factors in family history reports. The purpose of this study was to determine if individuals had discrepancies between written and interview reports of cancer family history and the role of psychosocial factors in these discrepancies. Oncology patients (n=104) were administered a survey to assess psychosocial factors (i.e., information-seeking, worry, perceived risk, and health literacy) and were asked to provide family history in a written and an interview form. Randomization determined which form individuals received first. No differences in the amount of missing data or the amount of unspecified data were noted between the written and interview method. Psychosocial factors did not differentiate between those who had discrepancies in family history reports and those who did not have discrepancies in family history reports; although there was a trend for those with lower literacy and those who were blunters to be more discrepant on type of cancer diagnosis. In sum, this preliminary study indicates that written and interview methods of family history assessment for first degree relatives may be used interchangeably. The ability to use written methods will facilitate collection of basic family history information in the oncology clinic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17318453What 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.