ArticleJournal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education2012
Preferences for genetic testing to identify hereditary colorectal cancer: perspectives of high-risk patients, community members, and clinicians.
Article in Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A theory-informed systematic review of clinicians' genetic testing practices.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Pooled it
- Patient preferences for massively parallel sequencing genetic testing of colorectal cancer risk: a discrete choice experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Trial
- How psychological distance of a study sample in discrete choice experiments affects preference measurement: a colorectal cancer screening case study.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Preferences for genetic testing for colorectal cancer within a population-based screening program: a discrete choice experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Article
- Value of Genetic Testing for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer in a Probability-Based US Online Sample.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2015Article
- Valuations of genetic test information for treatable conditions: the case of colorectal cancer screening.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2014Article
- ACMG technical standards and guidelines for genetic testing for inherited colorectal cancer (Lynch syndrome, familial adenomatous polyposis, and MYH-associated polyposis).Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2014Article
- Public attitudes towards genomic risk profiling as a component of routine population screening.Genome · 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
The aim of this study was to establish key characteristics that patients, consumers, and health professionals value regarding genetic testing (GT) and personalized medicine using the example of GT for hereditary Lynch syndrome. We conducted a series of focus groups with individuals recruited from a clinic that follows those at high risk for hereditary cancer, individuals recruited from the community, physicians, and genetic counselors. Participants were presented with clinical scenarios about Lynch syndrome testing and asked to identify characteristics that they perceived as important in making decisions about GT. Forty-two participants (19 community members, 8 high-risk and cancer patients, 3 genetic counselors, and 8 physicians) participated. Among community members and patients, the most frequently discussed considerations were the personal impact of GT and family impact, respectively. Among physicians, the most frequently discussed topic was the characteristics of genomic services (e.g., test invasiveness); among genetic counselors, the most frequently discussed topic was evidence and recommendations. A variety of test characteristics were important in decision making about GT. High-risk patients, community members, and health care providers had different priorities. Health care professionals should be aware of differences between their own considerations about GT and those that are important to patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22131063What 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.