ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2016
Acceptability of, and Information Needs Regarding, Next-Generation Sequencing in People Tested for Hereditary Cancer: A Qualitative Study.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Implementation of precision medicine in treating non-communicable diseases: a systematic review.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Normative Issues in Next Generation Sequencing Gene Testing.Development & reproduction · 2023Article
- Stakeholder Perspectives on Navigating Evidentiary and Decision Uncertainty in Precision Oncology.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Information needs on breast cancer genetic and non-genetic risk factors in relatives of women with a BRCA1/2 or PALB2 pathogenic variant.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2021Article
- A qualitative study among patients with an inherited retinal disease on the meaning of genomic unsolicited findings.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Patients' and Oncologists' Knowledge and Expectations Regarding Tumor Multigene Next-Generation Sequencing: A Narrative Review.The oncologist · 2021Review
- Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: patient recommendations for improved risk communication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020Article
- Medical oncologists' perspectives of the Veterans Affairs National Precision Oncology Program.PloS one · 2020Article
- Attitudes, knowledge and consequences of uncertain genetic findings in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Next generation sequencing (NGS) for patients at risk of hereditary cancer syndromes can also identify non-cancer related mutations, as well as variants of unknown significance. This study aimed to determine what benefits and shortcomings patients perceive in relation to NGS, as well as their interest and information preferences in regards to such testing. Eligible patients had previously received inconclusive results from clinical mutation testing for cancer susceptibility. Semi-structured telephone interviews were subjected to qualitative analysis guided by the approach developed by Miles and Huberman. The majority of the 19 participants reported they would be interested in panel/genomic testing. Advantages identified included that it would enable better preparation and allow implementation of individualized preventative strategies, with few disadvantages mentioned. Almost all participants said they would want all results, not just those related to their previous diagnosis. Participants felt that a face-to-face discussion supplemented by an information booklet would be the best way to convey information and achieve informed consent. All participants wanted their information stored and reviewed in accordance with new developments. Although the findings indicate strong interest among these individuals, it seems that the consent process, and the interpretation and communication of results will be areas that will require revision to meet the needs of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26259529What 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.