Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26443265›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2016

Developing an intervention to facilitate family communication about inherited genetic conditions, and training genetic counsellors in its delivery.

Socio-Psychological Research in Genomics (SPRinG) Collaboration:, Ivan Eisler, Matthew Ellison, Frances Flinter, Jo Grey, Suzanne Hutchison, Carole Jackson, Louise Longworth, Rhona MacLeod, Marion McAllister and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. The Many Faces of Engagement: A Scoping Review of Paediatric Patient and Family Engagement in Clinical Care, Education and Research.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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 · 2020
    Article
  17. Psychological Impact of NBS for CF.International journal of neonatal screening · 2020
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. 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

17 authors.

Socio-Psychological Research in Genomics (SPRinG) Collaboration:
Ivan EislerSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Matthew EllisonHuntington's Disease Youth Organisation, London, UK.
Frances FlinterGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jo GreyAssociation for Multiple Endocrine Neoplasia Disorders (AMEND), Tunbridge Wells, UK.
Suzanne HutchisonSouth London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Carole JacksonKings College London, London, UK.
Louise LongworthBrunel University London, Middlesex, UK.
Rhona MacLeodCentral Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Marion McAllisterCardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
Alison MetcalfeKings College London, London, UK.
Trevor MurrellsKings College London, London, UK.
Christine PatchGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Stuart PritchardGenetic Alliance UK, London, UK.
Glenn RobertKings College London, London, UK.
Emma RowlandKings College London, London, UK.
Fiona UlphUniversity of Manchester, Manchester, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-DG-1211-10015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many families experience difficulty in talking about an inherited genetic condition that affects one or more of them. There have now been a number of studies identifying the issues in detail, however few have developed interventions to assist families. The SPRinG collaborative have used the UK Medical Research Council's guidance on Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions, to work with families and genetic counsellors (GCs) to co-design a psycho-educational intervention to facilitate family communication and promote better coping and adaptation to living with an inherited genetic condition for parents and their children (<18 years). The intervention is modelled on multi-family discussion groups (MFDGs) used in psychiatric settings. The MFDG was developed and tested over three phases. First focus groups with parents, young people, children and health professionals discussed whether MFDG was acceptable and proposed a suitable design. Using evidence and focus group data, the intervention and a training manual were developed and three GCs were trained in its delivery. Finally, a prototype MFDG was led by a family therapist and co-facilitated by the three GCs. Data analysis showed that families attending the focus groups and intervention thought MFDG highly beneficial, and the pilot sessions had a significant impact on their family' functioning. We also demonstrated that it is possible to train GCs to deliver the MFDG intervention. Further studies are now required to test the feasibility of undertaking a definitive randomised controlled trial to evaluate its effectiveness in improving family outcomes before implementing into genetic counselling practice.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicProfessional-Family RelationsProfessional-Patient RelationsAdaptation, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultChildCounselorsFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic Diseases, InbornHumansMale

Identifiers

PMID26443265
PMCPMC4820094

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.