Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23748176›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society2013

Timing of referral for genetic counseling and genetic testing in patients with ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma.

Akiva P Novetsky, Kylie Smith, Sheri A Babb, Donna B Jeffe, Andrea R Hagemann, Premal H Thaker, Matthew A Powell, David G Mutch, L Stewart Massad, Israel Zighelboim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Improving referral for genetic risk assessment in ovarian cancer using an electronic medical record system.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2014
    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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Akiva P NovetskyDivision of Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine and Siteman Cancer Center, St Louis, MO, USA. novetskya@wudosis.wustl.edu
Kylie Smith
Sheri A Babb
Donna B Jeffe
Andrea R Hagemann
Premal H Thaker
Matthew A Powell
David G Mutch
L Stewart Massad
Israel Zighelboim
Gynecologic Oncology Group · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TIMOTHY J. EBERLEIN · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to assess patients' preferences of the timing of referral for genetic counseling and testing in relation to the diagnosis, treatment, and recurrence of ovarian, tubal, or primary peritoneal cancers.

methodsNinety-two patients who underwent counseling and testing by 1 certified genetic counselor were identified. An introductory letter, consent form, and questionnaire were mailed to gather information regarding factors influencing the decision to undergo genetic counseling and testing and opinions regarding optimal timing. Medical records were reviewed for demographic and clinical data.

resultsOf 47 consenting women, 45 underwent testing. Eight (18%) were found to have a genetic mutation. Women lacked consensus about the optimal time for referral for and to undergo genetic testing, although women with stage I disease preferred testing after completion of chemotherapy. Most women were comfortable receiving the results by phone, but one third preferred an office visit.

conclusionsPatients' views regarding the best time to be referred for and undergo counseling and testing varied greatly. Because of the high mortality of this disease, clinicians should discuss referral early and personalize the timing to each patient. The subset of patients who prefer results disclosure during an office visit should be identified at the time of their initial counseling.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingReferral and ConsultationAdenocarcinoma, Clear CellAgedBRCA1 ProteinBRCA2 ProteinCystadenocarcinoma, SerousEndometrial NeoplasmsFallopian Tube NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMiddle AgedMutationBRCA1 ProteinBRCA1 protein, humanBRCA2 ProteinBRCA2 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID23748176
PMCPMC3864646
OpenAlexW2089266641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.