ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2020
Patients' willingness to reconsider cancer genetic testing after initially declining: Mention it again.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer genetic testing uptake in the primary care setting: Patient perspectives on barriers and facilitators throughout the testing process.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Reasons for refusal of genetic testing in the evaluation of autism spectrum disorder and intellectual developmental disorder with longitudinal follow-up on test completion.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Clinician Recommendation for Hereditary Genetic Testing in Participants at Increased Risk for Hereditary Cancer.Cancers · 2025Article
- Impact of barriers and motivators on intention and confidence to undergo hereditary cancer genetic testing.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Cancer patients' understandings of genetic variants of uncertain significance in clinical care.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- Treatment Switch in Poor Responders with Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Exploring the motivations of research participants who chose not to learn medically actionable secondary genetic findings about themselves.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Patient perspectives on variant reclassification after cancer susceptibility testing.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Patients at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes sometimes decline clinically appropriate genetic testing. The purpose of the current study was to understand what preferences, concerns, and desires informed their refusal as well as their current level of interest in being tested. We interviewed patients who had been seen in a hereditary cancer clinic at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and had declined genetic testing. In all, 21 in-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted. Although patients provided many reasons for declining testing, they most often cited their psychosocial state at the time of the initial invitation to participate in genetic testing as their reason for refusal. The majority (67%) said that they either would or had changed their mind about testing if/when their clinicians 'mentioned it again'. Patients at risk for hereditary cancer who refuse testing at the time of genetic counseling may later change their mind. In particular, if a patient declines testing around the time of a major medical diagnosis or intervention, clinicians who are providing ongoing care may want to raise the topic afresh after the patient has had time to recover from initial distress related to diagnosis or treatment. Strategies to prompt clinicians to have these conversations are suggested.
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.