Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22888347›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer epidemiology2012

Interpretation of melanoma risk feedback in first-degree relatives of melanoma patients.

Jennifer L Hay, Carlos Baguer, Yuelin Li, Irene Orlow, Marianne Berwick

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer epidemiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03130569 (Personalized Genomic Testing for Skin Cancer - Maximizing Utility and Reach), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03130569 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2015, after this paper: background citation

Personalized Genomic Testing for Skin Cancer - Maximizing Utility and Reach

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of New MexicoRan2015 to 2017Enrolled600ConditionsMelanoma (Skin)ArmsWeb-based Module Group
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Jennifer L HayDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 641 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10022, USA.
Carlos Baguer
Yuelin Li
Irene Orlow
Marianne Berwick

Funding

Melanoma RAS/BRAF Mutation:Heterogeneity-Risk-PrognosisR01CA112243 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI THOMAS, NANCY E. · 2005 to 2014
$5.4M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA112243
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Little is known about how individuals might interpret brief genetic risk feedback. We examined interpretation and behavioral intentions (sun protection, skin screening) in melanoma first-degree relatives (FDRs) after exposure to brief prototypic melanoma risk feedback. Using a 3 by 2 experimental pre-post design where feedback type (high-risk mutation, gene environment, and nongenetic) and risk level (positive versus negative findings) were systematically varied, 139 melanoma FDRs were randomized to receive one of the six scenarios. All scenarios included an explicit reminder that melanoma family history increased their risk regardless of their feedback. The findings indicate main effects by risk level but not feedback type; positive findings led to heightened anticipated melanoma risk perceptions and anticipated behavioral intentions. Yet those who received negative findings often discounted their family melanoma history. As such, 25%, 30%, and 32% of those who received negative mutation, gene-environment, and nongenetic feedback, respectively, reported that their risk was similar to the general population. Given the frequency with which those who pursue genetic testing may receive negative feedback, attention is needed to identify ideal strategies to present negative genetic findings in contexts such as direct to consumer channels where extensive genetic counseling is not required.

Identifiers

PMID22888347
PMCPMC3410311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.