Trial reportPublic health genomics2014
Interest and informational preferences regarding genomic testing for modest increases in colorectal cancer risk.
Trial report in Public health genomics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping psychosocial interventions in familial colorectal cancer: a rapid systematic review.BMC cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Patient preferences for massively parallel sequencing genetic testing of colorectal cancer risk: a discrete choice experiment.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Trial
- Psychosocial and behavioral impact of breast cancer risk assessed by testing for common risk variants: protocol of a prospective study.BMC cancer · 2017Trial
- Psychosocial predictors of hereditary cancer genetic testing motivation in untested individuals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Risk-Stratified Screening for Colorectal Cancer Using Genetic and Environmental Risk Factors: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Based on Real-World Data.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2023Article
- Attitudes Toward Glaucoma Genetic Risk Assessment in Unaffected Individuals.Translational vision science & technology · 2022Article
- Colorectal Cancer Survivors' Receptivity toward Genomic Testing and Targeted Use of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs to Prevent Cancer Recurrence.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Risk-Stratified Colorectal Cancer Screening Based on Polygenic Risk: Current Status and Future Potential.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
- Making Sense of SNPs: Women's Understanding and Experiences of Receiving a Personalized Profile of Their Breast Cancer Risks.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- Factors Associated with Interest in Gene-Panel Testing and Risk Communication Preferences in Women from BRCA1/2 Negative Families.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Attitudes to incorporating genomic risk assessments into population screening programs: the importance of purpose, context and deliberation.BMC medical genomics · 2016Article
- The Human Genome Project, and recent advances in personalized genomics.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsThis study explored the interest in genomic testing for modest changes in colorectal cancer risk and preferences for receiving genomic risk communications among individuals with intermediate disease risk due to a family history of colorectal cancer.
methodsSurveys were conducted on 272 men and women at intermediate risk for colorectal cancer enrolled in a randomized trial comparing a remote personalized risk communication intervention (TeleCARE) aimed at promoting colonoscopy to a generic print control condition. Guided by Leventhal's Common Sense Model of Self-Regulation, we examined demographic and psychosocial factors possibly associated with interest in SNP testing. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression models were used to identify factors associated with interest in SNP testing and preferences for receiving genomic risk communications.
resultsThree-fourths of participants expressed interest in SNP testing for colorectal cancer risk. Testing interest did not markedly change across behavior modifier scenarios. Participants preferred to receive genomic risk communications from a variety of sources: printed materials (69.5%), oncologists (54.8%), primary-care physicians (58.4%), and the web (58.1%). Overall, persons who were unmarried (p = 0.029), younger (p = 0.003) and with greater cancer-related fear (p = 0.019) were more likely to express interest in predictive genomic testing for colorectal cancer risk. In a stratified analysis, cancer-related fear was associated with the interest in predictive genomic testing in the intervention group (p = 0.017), but not the control group.
conclusionsIndividuals with intermediate familial risk for colorectal cancer are highly interested in genomic testing for modest increases in disease risk, specifically unmarried persons, younger age groups and those with greater cancer fear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.