Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29455319›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Development and Pilot Testing of a Decision Aid for Genomic Research Participants Notified of Clinically Actionable Research Findings for Cancer Risk.

Amanda M Willis, Sian K Smith, Bettina Meiser, Mandy L Ballinger, David M Thomas, Martin Tattersall, International Sarcoma Kindred Study (ISKS), Kathleen Cuningham National Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab), Mary-Anne Young

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Breast cancer polygenic risk scores: a 12-month prospective study of patient reported outcomes and risk management behavior.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Article
  3. Systematic Development of Patient Decision Aids: An Update from the IPDAS Collaboration.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2021
    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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amanda M WillisPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Australia, Level 4, Lowy Cancer Research Centre C25, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia. amanda.willis@student.unsw.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-1529-3833
Sian K SmithPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Australia, Level 4, Lowy Cancer Research Centre C25, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Bettina MeiserPsychosocial Research Group, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Australia, Level 4, Lowy Cancer Research Centre C25, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia.
Mandy L BallingerThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre and Cancer Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
David M ThomasThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre and Cancer Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Martin TattersallDepartment of Cancer Medicine, Sydney Medical School, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia.
International Sarcoma Kindred Study (ISKS)
Kathleen Cuningham National Consortium for Research into Familial Breast Cancer (kConFab)
Mary-Anne YoungThe Kinghorn Cancer Centre and Cancer Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Garvan Institute of Medical Research · AUUNSW Sydney · AURoyal Prince Alfred Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Germline genomic testing is increasingly used in research to identify genetic causes of disease, including cancer. However, there is evidence that individuals who are notified of clinically actionable research findings have difficulty making informed decisions regarding uptake of genetic counseling for these findings. This study aimed to produce and pilot test a decision aid to assist participants in genomic research studies who are notified of clinically actionable research findings to make informed choices regarding uptake of genetic counseling. Development was guided by published literature, the International Patient Decision Aid Standards, and the expertise of a steering committee of clinicians, researchers, and consumers. Decision aid acceptability was assessed by self-report questionnaire. All 19 participants stated that the decision aid was easy to read, clearly presented, increased their understanding of the implications of taking up research findings, and would be helpful in decision-making. While low to moderate levels of distress/worry were reported after reading the booklet, a majority of participants also reported feeling reassured. All participants would recommend the booklet to others considering uptake of clinically actionable research findings. Results indicate the decision aid is acceptable to the target audience, with potential as a useful decision support tool for genomic research participants.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingStress, PsychologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient ParticipationPilot ProjectsVictoriaCancerDecision aidDecision supportGenetic counselingGermline genomic testingHereditary cancerNotification

Identifiers

PMID29455319
OpenAlexW2788513091

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.