Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28168332›Full record

SynthesisJournal of genetic counseling2017

A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling.

Lisa Madlensky, Angela M Trepanier, Deborah Cragun, Barbara Lerner, Kristen M Shannon, Heather Zierhut

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of genetic counseling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

78 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic evidence review and meta-analysis of outcomes associated with cancer genetic counseling.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Lisa MadlenskyMoores UCSD Cancer Center, University of California San Diego, 3855 Health Sciences Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92091-0901, USA. lmadlensky@ucsd.edu.
Angela M TrepanierCenter for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA.
Deborah CragunDepartment of Global Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Barbara LernerCenter for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA, USA.
Kristen M ShannonMass General Cancer Center, Mass General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Heather ZierhutDepartment of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As healthcare reimbursement is increasingly tied to value-of-service, it is critical for the genetic counselor (GC) profession to demonstrate the value added by GCs through outcomes research. We conducted a rapid systematic literature review to identify outcomes of genetic counseling. Web of Science (including PubMed) and CINAHL databases were systematically searched to identify articles meeting the following criteria: 1) measures were assessed before and after genetic counseling (pre-post design) or comparisons were made between a GC group vs. a non-GC group (comparative cohort design); 2) genetic counseling outcomes could be assessed independently of genetic testing outcomes, and 3) genetic counseling was conducted by masters-level genetic counselors, or non-physician providers. Twenty-three papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were in the cancer genetic setting and the most commonly measured outcomes included knowledge, anxiety or distress, satisfaction, perceived risk, genetic testing (intentions or receipt), health behaviors, and decisional conflict. Results suggest that genetic counseling can lead to increased knowledge, perceived personal control, positive health behaviors, and improved risk perception accuracy as well as decreases in anxiety, cancer-related worry, and decisional conflict. However, further studies are needed to evaluate a wider array of outcomes in more diverse genetic counseling settings.

Indexed as

Patient Outcome AssessmentAdultAnxietyChildEarly Detection of CancerFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic TestingHealth BehaviorHumansMiddle AgedPersonal SatisfactionPregnancyGenetic counselingOutcomesReview

Identifiers

PMID28168332

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.