Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25132793›Full record

ArticleFamilies, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare2008

Disclosure of Positive

Lindsey M Hoskins, Kevin Roy, June A Peters, Jennifer T Loud, Mark H Greene

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Families, systems & health : the journal of collaborative family healthcare, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lindsey M HoskinsClinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health; Department of Family Science, School of Public Health University of Maryland.
Kevin RoyDepartment of Family Science, School of Public Health University of Maryland.
June A PetersClinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health;
Jennifer T LoudClinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health;
Mark H GreeneClinical Genetics Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health;
National Institutes of Health · US

Funding

Intervention Trials in Persons at Increased Genetic Risk of CancerZIACP010145 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI SAVAGE, SHARON A. · 2009 to 2025
$12.2M
Intervention Trials in Persons w/ Genetic Risk of CancerZ01CP010145 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI GREENE, MARK H · 2000 to 2008
$9.2M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA CP010145
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BRCA1/2-positive women who learn their mutation status early in the life-course face unique challenges related to navigating the tasks of young adulthood. Using qualitative methods and grounded theory, the authors analyzed in-depth interviews with 11 women aged 26 to 35 who learned their mutation status before marriage. Their narratives illustrate the complexity of relationship formation, and highlight the potential for relationship-bonding and intimacy-building in the course of sharing mutation information. Disclosing BRCA mutation status to dating partners is often preceded by feelings of fear and anxiety, yet many participants reported that doing so has positive effects on relationships. Partners' abilities to respond with interest, empathy, and affection are associated with in creased future intimacy, consistent with generally accepted principles within the family/couple systems field. Individual cancer risk perception and familial cancer experiences may affect the disclosure experience, which can be understood via Attachment Theory. Our findings provide clinical insight, identify new areas for research, and suggest ways to assist this unique population in their adjustment to being BRCA mutation-positive.

Indexed as

BRCA1/2breast/ovarian cancer risk perceptioncouple relationshipspartner disclosurequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID25132793
PMCPMC4131236
OpenAlexW2024027439

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.