ArticleTobacco control2013
Motivations for genetic testing for lung cancer risk among young smokers.
Article in Tobacco control, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of barriers and motivators on intention and confidence to undergo hereditary cancer genetic testing.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Psychosocial factors impacting barriers and motivators to cancer genetic testing.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- In-vivo design feedback and perceived utility of a genetically-informed smoking risk tool among current smokers in the community.BMC medical genomics · 2021Article
- What do people think about genetics? A systematic review.Journal of community genetics · 2019Review
- Information Topics of Greatest Interest for Return of Genome Sequencing Results among Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer at a Young Age.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Mixed methods research in tobacco control with youth and young adults: A methodological review of current strategies.PloS one · 2017Review
- Predicting Avoidance of Skin Damage Feedback Among College Students.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2015Article
- Smokers' beliefs about the tobacco control potential of "a gene for smoking": a focus group study.BMC public health · 2014Article
- Introducing genetic testing for cardiovascular disease in primary care: a qualitative study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
- Young smokers' interpretations of the estimated lung cancer risk associated with a common genetic variant of low penetrance.Public health genomics · 2014Article
- Predictors of patient uptake of colorectal cancer gene environment risk assessment.Genome medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo examine why young people might want to undergo genetic susceptibility testing for lung cancer despite knowing that tested gene variants are associated with small increases in disease risk.
methodsThe authors used a mixed-method approach to evaluate motives for and against genetic testing and the association between these motivations and testing intentions in 128 college students who smoke.
resultsExploratory factor analysis yielded four reliable factors: Test Scepticism, Test Optimism, Knowledge Enhancement and Smoking Optimism. Test Optimism and Knowledge Enhancement correlated positively with intentions to test in bivariate and multivariate analyses (ps<0.001). Test Scepticism correlated negatively with testing intentions in multivariate analyses (p<0.05). Open-ended questions assessing testing motivations generally replicated themes of the quantitative survey.
conclusionIn addition to learning about health risks, young people may be motivated to seek genetic testing for reasons, such as gaining knowledge about new genetic technologies more broadly.
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.