Trial reportPloS one2018
Improving comprehension of genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer clients with a visual tool.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Investigating the Impact of Screen-Sharing Visual Aids during Genomic Results Disclosure via Telehealth in Diverse Families in the TeleKidSeq Pilot Study.Public health genomics · 2025Trial
- Relationships between genetic counseling students' screensharing, nonverbal and verbal communication, and satisfaction in simulated telehealth visits.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Picture this: Evaluating the efficacy of genetic counseling visual aids.Journal of genetic counseling · 2024Article
- The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Applying the framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions to increase family communication about hereditary cancer.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- The TeleKidSeq pilot study: incorporating telehealth into clinical care of children from diverse backgrounds undergoing whole genome sequencing.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Patient decision support resources inform decisions about cancer susceptibility genetic testing and risk management: a systematic review of patient impact and experience.Frontiers in health services · 2023Review
- Knowledge and psychosocial impact of genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among individuals with ovarian cancer.Familial cancer · 2022Article
- Feasibility and Assessment of a Cascade Traceback Screening Program (FACTS): Protocol for a Multisite Study to Implement and Assess an Ovarian Cancer Traceback Cascade Testing Program.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveGenetic counseling and testing can be offered to individuals who are at high risk of carrying a breast cancer (BRCA) gene mutation. However, the content of genetic counseling could be difficult to understand due to complex medical information. The aim of this study was to investigate if comprehension can be improved with a new genetic counseling tool (NGCT hereafter; a tool that combines complex medical information with pictures, diagrams and tables) as compared to conventional oral-only genetic counseling (CGC).
methods207 clients attended genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer at the Medical University of Vienna between February 2015 and February 2016. Seventy clients participated in this study and were allocated into two groups: the first 36 participants received conventional (oral only) genetic counseling (CGC) and the following 34 participants received genetic counseling using a new genetic counseling tool (NGCT), which combines complex information with pictures, diagrams and tables. After genetic counseling, all consenting participants were invited to complete a questionnaire with seven questions evaluating their comprehension of the medical information provided.
resultsSocio-demographic backgrounds were comparable in both groups. Correct responses were significantly higher in the NGCT group compared to the CGC group (p = 0.012). NGCT also statistically improves correct response of Q1 (p = 0.03) and Q7 (p = 0.004).
conclusionThe NGCT leads to an overall better understanding of the content of a genetic counseling session than CGC alone.
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.