Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29700101›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2018

Evaluation of a decision aid for incidental genomic results, the Genomics ADvISER: protocol for a mixed methods randomised controlled trial.

Salma Shickh, Marc Clausen, Chloe Mighton, Selina Casalino, Esha Joshi, Emily Glogowski, Kasmintan A Schrader, Adena Scheer, Christine Elser, Seema Panchal and 14 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03244202 (Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid for Incidental Genomic Findings), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT03244202 nacompletednot on this map

Randomized Controlled Trial of a Decision Aid for Incidental Genomic Findings

TypeinterventionalSponsorUnity Health TorontoRan2016 to 2018Enrolled133ConditionsCancerArmsDecision Aid Plus Counselling, Genetic Counselling Only
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The role of digital tools in the delivery of genomic medicine: enhancing patient-centered care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Digital health-enabled genomics: Opportunities and challenges.American journal of human genetics · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Evaluating the resource implications of different service delivery models for offering additional genomic findings.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Informed Consent in the Genomics Era.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

24 authors.

Salma ShickhUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Marc ClausenSt. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Chloe MightonUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Selina CasalinoSt. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Esha JoshiUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Emily GlogowskiGeneDx, Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA.
Kasmintan A SchraderHereditary Cancer Program, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Adena ScheerSt. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Christine ElserUniversity Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Seema PanchalMount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrea EisenSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Tracy GrahamSunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Melyssa AronsonMount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Kara M SemotiukMount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Laura Winter-PaquetteMount Sinai Hospital, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michael EvansUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jordan Lerner-EllisUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
June C CarrollUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Jada G HamiltonMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, Ontario, USA.
Kenneth OffitMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, Ontario, USA.
Mark RobsonMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, Ontario, USA.
Kevin E ThorpeDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andreas LaupacisUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Yvonne BombardUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
CIHRNCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGenome sequencing, a novel genetic diagnostic technology that analyses the billions of base pairs of DNA, promises to optimise healthcare through personalised diagnosis and treatment. However, implementation of genome sequencing faces challenges including the lack of consensus on disclosure of incidental results, gene changes unrelated to the disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance to the patient and their provider. Current recommendations encourage clinicians to return medically actionable incidental results and stress the importance of education and informed consent. Given the shortage of genetics professionals and genomics expertise among healthcare providers, decision aids (DAs) can help fill a critical gap in the clinical delivery of genome sequencing. We aim to assess the effectiveness of an interactive DA developed for selection of incidental results. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will compare the DA in combination with a brief Q&A session with a genetic counsellor to genetic counselling alone in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Patients who received negative standard cancer genetic results for their personal and family history of cancer and are thus eligible for sequencing will be recruited from cancer genetics clinics in Toronto. Our primary outcome is decisional conflict. Secondary outcomes are knowledge, satisfaction, preparation for decision-making, anxiety and length of session with the genetic counsellor. A subset of participants will complete a qualitative interview about preferences for incidental results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by research ethics boards of St. Michael's Hospital, Mount Sinai Hospital and Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. This research poses no significant risk to participants. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a novel patient-centred tool to support clinical delivery of incidental results. Results will be shared through national and international conferences, and at a stakeholder workshop to develop a consensus statement to optimise implementation of the DA in practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03244202; Pre-results.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesGenetic CounselingIncidental FindingsAdolescentAdultCounselingDecision MakingGenomicsHumansInformed ConsentRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicdecision supporte-counsellinggenome sequencingshared-decision making

Identifiers

PMID29700101
PMCPMC5922516

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

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.