ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2010
"What would you do if you were me?" Effects of counselor self-disclosure versus non-disclosure in a hypothetical genetic counseling session.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Better Data from AI Users: A Field Experiment on the Impacts of Robot Self-Disclosure on the Utterance of Child Users in Home Environment.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Attitudes Towards Prenatal Genetic Counseling, Prenatal Genetic Testing, and Termination of Pregnancy among Southeast and East Asian Women in the United States.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Interdisciplinary education for genetic counselors: developing the concept and assessing the need in australasia.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
- What would you say? Genetic counseling graduate students' and counselors' hypothetical responses to patient requested self-disclosure.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
- When the topic is you: genetic counselor responses to prenatal patients' requests for self-disclosure.Journal of genetic counseling · 2013Article
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
Two prior studies suggest genetic counselors self-disclose primarily because patients ask them to do so (Peters et al., 2004; Thomas et al., 2006). However, scant research has investigated effects of counselor disclosure on genetic counseling processes and outcomes. In this study, 151 students (98 undergraduates, 53 graduates) completed one of three surveys describing a hypothetical genetic counseling session in which a patient at risk for FAP was considering whether to pursue testing or surveillance procedures. Dialogue was identical in all surveys, except for a final response to the question: "What would you do if you were me?" The counselor either revealed what she would do (Personal Disclosure), what other patients have done (Professional Disclosure), or deflected the question (No Disclosure). Imagining themselves as the patient, participants wrote a response to the counselor and indicated their perceptions of her. Participants rated the non-disclosing counselor significantly lower in social attractiveness than either disclosing counselor, and less satisfying than the professional disclosing counselor. Analysis of written responses yielded four themes: Made Decision, Sought Information, Expressed Thoughts/Feelings, and No Decision. Practice implications and research recommendations are provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20680420What 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.