Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28301458›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2017

The psychosocial effects of the Li-Fraumeni Education and Early Detection (LEAD) program on individuals with Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

Jessica Ross, Jasmina Bojadzieva, Susan Peterson, Sarah Jane Noblin, Rebecca Yzquierdo, Martha Askins, Louise Strong

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Provider and patient perceptions on the usage of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in oncology: a scoping review.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2026
    Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Medical guidelines for Li-Fraumeni syndrome 2019, version 1.1.International journal of clinical oncology · 2021
    Article
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jessica RossClinical Cancer Genetics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5575-6356
Jasmina BojadzievaDepartment of Genetics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1657-6034
Susan PetersonThe University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Sarah Jane NoblinThe University of Texas Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Rebecca YzquierdoDepartment of Behavioral Science, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4274-0408
Martha AskinsDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2020-3350
Louise StrongDepartment of Genetics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of Houston · US

Funding

TEXAS CANCER GENETICS CONSORTIUMU24CA078142 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI STRONG, LOUISE C · 1998 to 2006
$6.3M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA078142
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn the past 5 years, new screening protocols have been developed that provide improved cancer screening options for individuals with Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS). Very little has been published on the psychosocial impact of these screening protocols. The goals of this study were to determine how participation in screening impacts individuals psychosocially, to examine the benefits and drawbacks of screening, and to evaluate possible barriers to continued screening.

methodsWe performed a qualitative study consisting of semistructured phone interviews conducted from December 2015 to February 2016 with 20 individuals attending the LFS screening program at MD Anderson Cancer Center.

resultsData analysis showed that benefits of screening include early detection, peace of mind, centralized screening, knowledge providing power, and screening making LFS seem more livable. Perceived drawbacks included logistical issues, difficulty navigating the system, screening being draining, and significant negative emotional reactions such as anxiety, fear, and skepticism. Regardless of the emotions that were present, 100% of participants planned on continuing screening in the program.

conclusionOur data indicate that the perceived benefits of screening outweigh the drawbacks of screening. Individuals in this screening program appeared to have improved psychosocial well-being because of their access to the screening program.Genet Med advance online publication 16 March 2017.

Indexed as

Early Detection of CancerAdolescentAdultEmotionsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGerm-Line MutationHumansLi-Fraumeni SyndromeMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionPublic Health SurveillanceQualitative ResearchTexasYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID28301458
PMCPMC5875687
OpenAlexW2346711478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.