Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17597387›Full record

Trial reportJournal of genetic counseling2007

Successful use of peer educators for sharing genetic information.

Vickie L Venne, Heidi A Hamann

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Development of Breast Cancer Choices: a decision support tool for young women with breast cancer deciding whether to have genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2019
    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

2 authors.

Vickie L VenneHuntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. vickie.venne@hci.utah.edu
Heidi A Hamann

Funding

MODEL--PEER EDUCATION FOR GENETICS AND BREAST CANCERR03CA070610 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI VENNE, VICKIE L · 1995 to 1996
–
NCI NIH HHS CA70610
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the impact of a genetics education module provided by Reach to Recovery peer volunteers. Participants included 113 women with confirmed breast cancer diagnoses. Eighty-eight of these women (78%) completed a baseline survey, participated in a peer-led intervention, and completed a follow-up survey. Approximately half of the women received an education module that included a genetic component, while the other half did not. Results indicated that women who received the genetics module had greater increases in genetics knowledge than the group that did not receive the module. However, follow-up interest in genetic testing was not significantly different between the two groups. Results indicate that a peer-led genetics module can increase knowledge about genetics. However, it does not appear to have a differential effect on genetic testing interest.

Indexed as

Patient Education as TopicPeer GroupSelf DisclosureAdultAgedAged, 80 and overApoptosis Regulatory ProteinsBRCA2 ProteinBreast NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMiddle AgedApoptosis Regulatory ProteinsBLID protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, human

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.