ArticleFamilial cancer2008
Inequality of use of cancer genetics services by members of breast, ovarian and colorectal cancer families in South East Scotland.
Article in Familial cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cancer burden in individuals with single versus double pathogenic variants in cancer susceptibility genes.Genetics in medicine open · 2024Article
- Differences in Cancer Phenotypes Among Frequent CHEK2 Variants and Implications for Clinical Care-Checking CHEK2.JAMA oncology · 2022Article
- Examining the uptake of predictive BRCA testing in the UK; findings and implications.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2021Article
- Who is being referred to cancer genetic counseling? Characteristics of counselees and their referral.Journal of community genetics · 2012Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Some studies have found a deficiency of male, younger and more socially deprived individuals amongst referrals to and/or attendees at cancer genetics clinics. We investigated this inequality of use of genetics services from data on 4,178 Scottish patients with a family history of breast and/or ovarian cancer (BOC) or colorectal cancer (CRC) referred from 2000--2006. Some 98% BOC and 60% CRC referrals were female. Median age of female referrals was greater in the CRC than the BOC group (45.3 vs. 38.7 years, P < 0.001). Both groups of referrals were less socially deprived than the general population (P < 0.001) and the CRC less deprived than the BOC group (P < 0.001). Some 88% patients attended the first appointment offered. Attendance was greater in the CRC group (P < 0.001) and in older patients (P < 0.001) and in the BOC group was highly significantly lower in more socially deprived patients (P < 0.001). Male relatives may feel counselling is less relevant and relatives of both sexes may delay counselling until approaching the age of onset of cancer in a relative. We suggest that medical professionals and the general public may have more knowledge about the genetics of BOC than of CRC. Thus relatives in CRC families seeking counselling are likely to be those with access to more information. The lower attendance amongst more deprived relatives in BOC families may result from poor understanding of the reason for referral. These findings confirm the need to provide male, younger and more socially deprived relatives with more helpful information on cancer genetics.
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.