ArticleFamilial cancer2014
Evaluation after five years of the cancer genetic counselling programme of Valencian Community (Eastern Spain).
Article in Familial cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genetic cancer risk assessment in general practice: systematic review of tools available, clinician attitudes, and patient outcomes.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019Pooled it
- Building a hereditary cancer program in Colombia: analysis of germline pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants spectrum in a high-risk cohort.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Use of family history taking for hereditary neoplastic syndromes screening in primary health care: A systematic review protocol.PloS one · 2022Article
- Retinoblastoma genetics screening and clinical management.BMC medical genomics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the cancer genetic counselling programme in Valencian Community using intermediate indicators. Descriptive analysis of organisational and effectiveness indicators from the start in 2005 until December 2010: correct referral of patients according to the area from where they were referred (primary or hospital-based care) and syndrome; families identified as having each syndrome; suitability of the genetic testing for individuals with a cancer diagnosis (index cases, IC) and relatives of ICs with mutations; family size; and results of genetic testing on genes, ICs and relatives. 9,942 individuals attended, 87.7 % were referred by hospital-based care and 8.4 % by primary care. 7,516 patients (79 %) fulfilled cancer genetic counselling criteria (82 % from hospital-based care and 46 % from primary care). Amongst those who fulfilled the criteria, 59 % of referrals were related to hereditary breast ovarian cancer syndrome and 32 % to hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer. ICs were found in 3,082 families (78.7 %) and genetic testing was carried out on 91.3 % of them. Pathogenic mutations were detected in 21.8 % of the ICs and the testing was then offered to their relatives (an average of 3 per IC). Pathogenic mutations were found in 54 % of the assessed relatives. Results in 5 years confirm the appropriateness of these facilities, as part of an integrated health service, to identify families and individuals with genetic risk to offer them personalized counselling. Improvements have to be made with regard to the information given to both health professionals and patients about the risk criteria for various syndromes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24242329What 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.