ArticleFamilial cancer2019
Unsolicited information letters to increase awareness of Lynch syndrome and familial colorectal cancer: reactions and attitudes.
Article in Familial cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Public perspectives on healthcare professional-directed communication of hereditary genetic risks: a mixed-method systematic review.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Pooled it
- Direct letters to relatives at risk of hereditary cancer-a randomised trial on healthcare-assisted versus family-mediated risk disclosure.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Trial
- Public attitudes toward cascade genetic screening in the United States.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Cascade counselling and testing. Recommendations of the European Society of Human Genetics.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Developing a questionnaire to explore lay people's preferences for communicating hereditary conditions within families: insights from a cognitive interview study.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Healthcare provider-mediated cascade testing of Lynch syndrome to at-risk family members: an interview study.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- Genomic findings with familial implications: agenda setting in light of mainstreaming.Open research Europe · 2025Article
- Who has the responsibility to inform relatives at risk of hereditary cancer? A population-based survey in Sweden.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Clinician perspectives on policy approaches to genetic risk disclosure in families.Familial cancer · 2024Article
- The experience of receiving a letter from a cancer genetics clinic about risk for hereditary cancer.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- National Experiences from 30 Years of Provider-Mediated Cascade Testing in Lynch Syndrome Families-The Danish Model.Cancers · 2024Article
- Public attitudes challenge clinical practice on genetic risk disclosure in favour of healthcare-provided direct dissemination to relatives.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Article
- Acceptability and Usability of the Family Gene Toolkit for Swiss and Korean Families HarboringCancers · 2023Article
- The Impact of Proband Indication for Genetic Testing on the Uptake of Cascade Testing Among Relatives.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- A Focus Group Study of Perceptions of Genetic Risk Disclosure in Members of the Public in Sweden: "I'll Phone the Five Closest Ones, but What Happens to the Other Ten?"Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- Room for improvement: One third of Lynch syndrome patients presenting for genetic testing in a highly specialised centre in Stockholm already have cancer.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2021Article
- Healthcare professionals' responsibility for informing relatives at risk of hereditary disease.Journal of medical ethics · 2020Article
- How to inform at-risk relatives? Attitudes of 1379 Dutch patients, relatives, and members of the general population.Journal of genetic counseling · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dissemination of information on a genetically increased risk should according to guidelines primarily be family-mediated. Incomplete and incorrect information spread has, however, been documented and implies missed possibilities for prevention. In Denmark, the national HNPCC register has been granted an exception to send unsolicited letters with information on hereditary colorectal cancer and an invitation to genetic counseling to members of families with familial and hereditary colorectal cancer. To evaluate this approach, we investigated reactions and attitudes to unsolicited letters in 708 members of families with genetic predisposition and in 1600 individuals from the general population. Support for information letters was expressed by 78% of the family members and by 82% of the general population. Regarding route of information, 90% of family members preferred a letter to no information, 66% preferred information from the hospital rather than from family members and 40% preferred to obtain information from a close family member. Our results suggest that use of unsolicited information letters from the health care system may be a feasible and highly acceptable strategy to disseminate information to families at high risk of colorectal cancer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29651783What 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.