Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24386893›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2015

Why do women not return family history forms when referred to breast cancer genetics services? A mixed-method study.

Kirstie A Hanning, Michael Steel, David Goudie, Lorna McLeish, Jackie Dunlop, Jessica Myring, Frank Sullivan, Jonathan Berg, Gerry Humphris, Gozde Ozakinci

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 90% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kirstie A HanningDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Michael SteelDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
David GoudieDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Lorna McLeishDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Jackie DunlopDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Jessica MyringDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Frank SullivanPopulation Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Jonathan BergDepartment of Clinical Genetics and Tayside Familial Breast/Ovarian Cancer Service, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Gerry HumphrisSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Gozde OzakinciSchool of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
Ninewells Hospital · GBUniversity of St Andrews · GBUniversity of Dundee · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonal and family data forms, completed by women referred to breast cancer genetics clinics, are valuable tools for verification and extension of family history, crucial steps in accurate risk evaluation. A significant minority of women do not complete and return these forms, despite reminders, even when completion is a pre-requisite for a clinic appointment.

objectiveTo facilitate access of women at increased familial risk of breast cancer to screening and counselling services by investigating reasons for non-return of the forms. PARTICIPANTS AND

designBased on a single regional 'breast cancer family' service in the UK, Analysis of quantitative data comparing women who did not return forms (n = 55) with those who had done so (n = 59), together with qualitative evaluation of potential barriers to form-completion through semi-structured telephone interviews with a random subset of 'non-returners' (n = 23).

resultsNon-returners have higher proportions of the very young (below the age at which surveillance could be offered) and of women from lower social deprivation categories. Interviews revealed that the majority of non-returners are anxious, rather than unconcerned about their breast cancer risk and circumstances and attitudes contributed to non-compliance. Twenty-one participants confirmed that they would welcome an appointment at a 'breast cancer family' clinic, but nine did not attend for the appointment. They were significantly younger than those who attend, but were not at lower familial risk. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsMany women who fail to complete and return a family history form would benefit from risk assessment and genetic counselling. Several steps are suggested that might help them access the relevant services.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingGenetic TestingPatient ComplianceAdultAge FactorsAmbulatory Care FacilitiesBreast NeoplasmsFamily HealthFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansMiddle AgedPedigreeReferral and ConsultationRisk AssessmentRisk Factorsbreast cancercancer geneticsfamily history of cancergenetic counselling

Identifiers

PMID24386893
PMCPMC5060843
OpenAlexW2047314499

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.