ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2015
Do Health Professionals Need Additional Competencies for Stratified Cancer Prevention Based on Genetic Risk Profiling?
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perspectives from a multi-stakeholder workshop for implementing a risk-stratified breast cancer screening program in Canada.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Standardization, Education, and Resourcing: The Way Forward for Implementing Polygenic Risk Scores in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Article
- Stakeholder Perception of the Implementation of Genetic Risk Testing for Twelve Multifactorial Diseases.Genes · 2023Article
- Canadian Healthcare Professionals' Views and Attitudes toward Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- CLIN_SKAT: an R package to conduct association analysis using functionally relevant variants.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Risk-Adjusted Cancer Screening and Prevention (RiskAP): Complementing Screening for Early Disease Detection by a Learning Screening Based on Risk Factors.Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Toward a Population-Based Breast Cancer Risk Stratification Approach? The Needs and Concerns of Healthcare Providers.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer: ENVISION consensus statement.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Review
- Envisioning Implementation of a Personalized Approach in Breast Cancer Screening Programs: Stakeholder Perspectives.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2019Article
- GP attitudes to and expectations for providing personal genomic risk information to the public: a qualitative study.BJGP open · 2019Article
- Population-Wide Genetic Risk Prediction of Complex Diseases: A Pilot Feasibility Study in Macau Population for Precision Public Healthcare Planning.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Health care professionals' attitudes towards population-based genetic testing and risk-stratification for ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional survey.BMC women's health · 2017Article
- Current directions in behavioral medicine research on genetic testing for disease susceptibility: introduction to the special section.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2015Article
- Multigene Panel Testing for Hereditary Cancer Risk.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is growing evidence that inclusion of genetic information about known common susceptibility variants may enable population risk-stratification and personalized prevention for common diseases including cancer. This would require the inclusion of genetic testing as an integral part of individual risk assessment of an asymptomatic individual. Front line health professionals would be expected to interact with and assist asymptomatic individuals through the risk stratification process. In that case, additional knowledge and skills may be needed. Current guidelines and frameworks for genetic competencies of non-specialist health professionals place an emphasis on rare inherited genetic diseases. For common diseases, health professionals do use risk assessment tools but such tools currently do not assess genetic susceptibility of individuals. In this article, we compare the skills and knowledge needed by non-genetic health professionals, if risk-stratified prevention is implemented, with existing competence recommendations from the UK, USA and Europe, in order to assess the gaps in current competences. We found that health professionals would benefit from understanding the contribution of common genetic variations in disease risk, the rationale for a risk-stratified prevention pathway, and the implications of using genomic information in risk-assessment and risk management of asymptomatic individuals for common disease prevention.
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.