Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24355094›Full record

ReviewClinical genetics2014

Communication and technology in genetic counseling for familial cancer.

H T Lynch, C Snyder, M Stacey, B Olson, S K Peterson, S Buxbaum, T Shaw, P M Lynch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Quantifying family dissemination and identifying barriers to communication of risk information in Australian BRCA families.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2017
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Milestones of Lynch syndrome: 1895-2015.Nature reviews. Cancer · 2015
    Review
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

8 authors.

H T LynchDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, USA.
C Snyder
M Stacey
B Olson
S K Peterson
S Buxbaum
T Shaw
P M Lynch

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Fabien Delerue · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
Understanding Obesity In Relation to the Built EnvironmentP20MD006899 · NIMHD · JACKSON STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ANTOINE-LAVIGNE, DONNA A · 2012 to 2016
$5.3M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NIMHD NIH HHS P20 MD006899
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When a cancer predisposing germline mutation is detected in an index case, the presence of the underlying syndrome is confirmed and the potential for predictive testing of at-risk relatives is established. However, the reporting of a positive family history does not routinely lead to communication of information about risk to close, much less distant relatives. This review summarizes information technology utilized to address penetration or 'reach' of knowledge of risk within extended families, including the use of telephone and video counseling to reach distant patients, and anticipate novel internet-based processes for communication between investigators and relatives.

Indexed as

CommunicationGenetic CounselingTechnologyFamilyGenes, BRCA1Genes, BRCA2Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGerm-Line MutationHumansNeoplasmsRiskTelecommunicationscolorectal cancerfamilial cancergenetic counselinggenetic testinghereditary cancerhereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancerinformation technologyLynch syndrome

Identifiers

PMID24355094
PMCPMC4371849

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.