Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20924407›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2011

Empowerment: qualitative underpinning of a new clinical genetics-specific patient-reported outcome.

Marion McAllister, Graham Dunn, Chris Todd

Open access · bronzeAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Prospects and challenges for the genetic counsellor profession in the German-speaking countries: report of a workshop.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marion McAllisterMedical Genetics Research Group, School of Biomedicine, The University of Manchester, The Nowgen Centre for Genetics in Healthcare, Manchester, UK. marion.mcallister@manchester.ac.uk
Graham Dunn
Chris Todd
University of Manchester · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0601696Medical Research Council G0601696(80383)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent qualitative research developed a new construct labelled Empowerment describing a new patient outcome from using clinical genetics services that included four dimensions: Knowledge and Understanding, Decision-Making, Instrumentality and Future-Orientation. The aim of this study was to explore the validity, relevance and importance of the Empowerment construct for use as a patient-reported outcome (PRO) for clinical genetics services, and to refine the construct if necessary. Qualitative research (interviews and focus groups) was conducted in the UK with 12 patients, 15 representatives from patient support groups, 10 genetics clinicians and 4 service commissioners. Participants were asked to (1) describe what they think are the patient benefits from using clinical genetics services and (2) critique the Empowerment construct as a PRO. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed in full and analyzed using grounded theory. Findings confirmed the relevance and importance of the Empowerment construct, and identified Emotional Regulation as a further dimension of Empowerment. Data analysis also resulted in refinement of the construct, by renaming the other four dimensions to be Cognitive Control, Decisional Control, Behavioural Control and Hope. Empowerment has the potential to be a useful PRO to evaluate interventions in clinical genetics, and for use in clinical practice to generate data for continuous quality improvement. A study is underway to operationalise Empowerment by developing a psychometrically sound PRO measure that will take the form of a short questionnaire.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePower, PsychologicalQualitative ResearchDecision MakingEmotionsFocus GroupsGenetics, MedicalGenetic TestingHumansInterviews as TopicQuality ImprovementSocial SupportTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID20924407
PMCPMC3021496
OpenAlexW2128495566

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.