Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25951739›Full record

SynthesisSeminars in oncology nursing2015

Genetic tests to identify risk for breast cancer.

Julie A Lynch, Vickie Venne, Brygida Berse

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Seminars in oncology nursing, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Genotypes and Haplotypes in theBritish journal of biomedical science · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Genomics-Guided Immunotherapy for Precision Medicine in Cancer.Cancer biotherapy & radiopharmaceuticals · 2019
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Racial/Ethnic Disparities in BRCA Counseling and Testing: a Narrative Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2019
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

Julie A Lynch
Vickie Venne
Brygida Berse

Funding

Intramural VA VA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo describe the currently available genetic tests that identify hereditary risk for breast cancer. DATA SOURCES: Systematic review of scientific literature, clinical practice guidelines, and data published by test manufacturers.

conclusionChanges in gene patent laws and advances in sequencing technologies have resulted in rapid expansion of genetic testing. While BRCA1/2 are the most recognized genes linked to breast cancer, several laboratories now offer multi-gene panels to detect many risk-related mutations. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Genetic testing will be increasingly important in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer. Oncology and advanced practice nurses must understand risk factors, significance of various genetic tests, and patient counseling.

Indexed as

Genetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansOncology NursingRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsBRCABreast genetic testinggenetic riskhereditary riskmultigene panels

Identifiers

PMID25951739
PMCPMC4998965

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.