ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2018
Distress, uncertainty, and positive experiences associated with receiving information on personal genomic risk of melanoma.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Trial
- A scalable new model of germline cancer genomic care delivery: Assessing psychological outcomes.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2026Article
- Reliability and validity of the multidimensional impact of cancer risk assessment (MICRA) questionnaire: Japanese version.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- A qualitative study exploring the consumer experience of receiving self-initiated polygenic risk scores from a third-party website.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
- The Clinical and Psychosocial Outcomes for Women Who Received Unexpected Clinically Actionable Germline Information Identified through Research: An Exploratory Sequential Mixed-Methods Comparative Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- 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 · 2021Article
- Acceptability of risk-stratified population screening across cancer types: Qualitative interviews with the Australian public.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Article
- Genetic Testing for Parkinson Disease: Are We Ready?Neurology. Clinical practice · 2021Review
- Psychometric Properties of the MICRA Questionnaire in Portuguese Individuals Carrying SDHx Mutations.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020Article
- Impute.me: An Open-Source, Non-profit Tool for Using Data From Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing to Calculate and Interpret Polygenic Risk Scores.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- GP attitudes to and expectations for providing personal genomic risk information to the public: a qualitative study.BJGP open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this research was to understand how genomics-based personal melanoma risk information impacts psychological and emotional health outcomes in the general population. In a pilot randomized controlled trial, participants (n = 103) completed the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire, 3 months after receiving personal melanoma genomic risk information. Mean scores for MICRA items and subscales were stratified by genomic risk group (low, average, high), gender, education, age, and family history of melanoma. P values were obtained from t-tests and analysis of variance tests. We found that overall, participants (mean age: 53 years, range: 21-69; 52% female) had a total MICRA mean score of 18.6 (standard deviation: 11.1, range: 1-70; possible range: 0-105). The high genomic risk group had higher mean scores for the total (24.2, F
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.