ArticleClinical genetics2015
Pre-test genetic counseling services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer delivered by non-genetics professionals in the state of Florida.
Article in Clinical genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of communication interventions to help healthcare professionals discuss genetic testing for breast cancer.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2020Pooled it
- Primary care providers' cancer genetic testing-related knowledge, attitudes, and communication behaviors: A systematic review and research agenda.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone Delivery of BRCA1/2 Genetic Counseling Compared With In-Person Counseling: 1-Year Follow-Up.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2016Trial
- Patient Perceptions of Telephone vs. In-Person BRCA1/BRCA2 Genetic Counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Trial
- Review
- The UTHealth Houston Adult Cardiovascular Genomics Certificate Program: Efficacy and Impact on Healthcare Professionals.Research square · 2024Article
- Preparing for the unexpected: Recommendations for returning secondary findings in late-stage cancer care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024Article
- Mapping the use of cardiovascular genetic services in pediatric clinical care: challenges and opportunities for improvement.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Combining clinical and molecular characterization of CDH1: a multidisciplinary approach to reclassification of a splicing variant.Familial cancer · 2023Article
- Exploring Stakeholders' Perspectives on Implementing Universal Germline Testing for Colorectal Cancer: Findings From a Clinical Practice Survey.JCO precision oncology · 2023Article
- Missed diagnosis or misdiagnosis: Common pitfalls in genetic testing.Singapore medical journal · 2023Article
- Return of comprehensive tumour genomic profiling results to advanced cancer patients: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Adapting a Theoretically-Based intervention for underserved clinical populations at increased risk for hereditary Cancer: Lessons learned from thePreventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Article
- A Narrative Review of Implementing Precision Oncology in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer in Emerging Countries.Oncology and therapy · 2021Review
- "I think that a brief conversation from their provider can go a very long way": Patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators of genetic testing after ovarian cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to Genetic Service Delivery Models: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2021Article
- Mainstreaming Genetic Testing for Adult Patients With Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease.Canadian journal of kidney health and disease · 2021Article
- Using patient perspectives to inform communication training materials for health care professionals discussing BRCA mutation testing.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2020Article
- The composition and capacity of the clinical genetics workforce in high-income countries: a scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer now includes practitioners from multiple healthcare professions, specialties, and settings. This study examined whether non-genetics professionals (NGPs) perform guideline-based patient intake and informed consent before genetic testing. NGPs offering BRCA testing services in Florida (n = 386) were surveyed about clinical practices. Among 81 respondents (response rate = 22%), approximately half reported: sometimes scheduling a separate session for pre-test counseling lasting 11-30 min prior to testing, discussing familial implications of testing, benefits and limitations of risk management options, and discussing the potential psychological impact and insurance-related issues. Few constructed a three-generation pedigree, discussed alternative hereditary cancer syndromes, or the meaning of a variant result. This lack of adherence to guideline-based practice may result in direct harm to patients and their family members. NGPs who are unable to deliver guideline adherent cancer genetics services should focus on identification and referral of at-risk patients to in person or telephone services provided by genetics professionals.
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.