ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2015
The Long and Short of Genetic Counseling Summary Letters: A Case-control Study.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Emotions in Health Literacy and Patient Education: Trends, Technologies, and Future Opportunities-A Scoping Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Adapting mainstreaming genetic education and clinical communication materials for cancer patients of varying backgrounds.Patient education and counseling · 2026Article
- Written communication of whole genome sequencing results in the NHS Genomic Medicine Service: a multi-centre service evaluation.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Participant and caregiver perspectives on health feedback from a healthy lifestyle check.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024Article
- Do research participants share genomic screening results with family members?Journal of genetic counseling · 2022Article
- Factors that Influence Intent to Share Genetic Information Related to Cancer Risk with Family Members.Journal of health communication · 2021Article
- Understanding the Return of Genomic Sequencing Results Process: Content Review of Participant Summary Letters in the eMERGE Research Network.Journal of personalized medicine · 2020Article
- Female family members lack understanding of indeterminate negative BRCA1/2 test results shared by probands.Journal of genetic counseling · 2019Article
- From the laboratory to the clinic: sharing BRCA VUS reclassification tools with practicing genetics professionals.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- Assessment of Current Genetic Counselor Practices in Post-Visit Written Communications to Patients.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- Limitations and Pitfalls of Using Family Letters to Communicate Genetic Risk: a Qualitative Study with Patients and Healthcare Professionals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- Assessment of the Readability of Genetic Counseling Patient Letters.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic counseling summary letters are intended to reinforce information received during genetic counseling, but little information is available on patient/family responses to these letters. We conducted a case-control study to assess the effectiveness of two different letter formats. Parents of children receiving a new diagnosis were enrolled. The control group (n = 85) received a genetic counseling summary letter in a narrative format, 4-5 pages in length. After the control enrollment period, genetic counselors were trained by a professional medical writer to develop a concise letter format. The case group (n = 64) received a concise letter, approximately 1.5 pages in length, utilizing simple sentences, lay terms, and lists/bullet points. Parents completed a survey 4 weeks after the visit to rate the letter's format, usefulness, and their emotional reaction. Results show that parents in the case group rated the letter more highly (p = 0.023), particularly in the emotional response dimension (rating changes in anxiety, depression, fear, ability to cope, and confidence in response to the letter). Parents in the case group also rated the genetic counseling session more highly (p = 0.039). In the control group, parents without a college degree were more likely to rate the letter as too long and the level of medical detail as too high. In the case group, no significant differences were seen between parents with or without a college degree. These data suggest that a short genetic counseling summary letter is rated higher by parents, and is particularly associated with a more positive emotional reaction. A short letter format highlighting the basic facts related to the genetic condition may be more useful to parents of diverse educational backgrounds, and may support a positive emotional adaptation at the time of a new diagnosis. Genetic counselors may benefit from specific instruction in medical and educational writing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25502223What 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.