ArticlePloS one2020
Evaluating clinician acceptability of the prototype CanRisk tool for predicting risk of breast and ovarian cancer: A multi-methods study.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 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
47 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- An introduction to polygenic scores - methodological basics and recent advances.Medizinische Genetik : Mitteilungsblatt des Berufsverbandes Medizinische Genetik e.V · 2026Article
- Multi-omics analysis in suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer cases reveals novel candidate susceptibility factors.NPJ breast cancer · 2026Article
- Harnessing genomics for early cancer detection, risk stratification and prevention.Nature genetics · 2026Review
- Implementation and Audit of Mainstream Genetic Testing Within a High-Volume UK Breast Unit for Pathogenic Variations Associated With Breast Cancer Using the R208 and R444.1 National Test Directory Criterion.The breast journal · 2026Article
- Patient and Physician Perspectives on Using Risk Prediction to Support Breast Cancer Surveillance Decision Making.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2026Article
- From bedside to bench: towards clinical predictive AI research that achieves real-world impact.BMJ digital health & AI · 2026Review
- Identification and management of genetic susceptibility to cancer: UK perspective.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
- Preventive Measures for Patients with an Elevated Genetic Risk for Gynecological Malignancies, in Particular Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Review
- Primary care online training on multifactorial breast cancer risk: pre-post evaluation study.BJGP open · 2025Article
- Article
- Incorporating familial risk, lifestyle factors, and pharmacogenomic insights into personalized noncommunicable disease (NCD) reports for healthcare funder beneficiaries participating in the Open Genome Project.Annals of human genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Impact of NICE Guideline NG241 'Ovarian Cancer: identifying and managing familial and genetic risk' on a regional NHS family history and clinical genetics service.Journal of medical genetics · 2025Article
- Hormonal Contraception and Breast Cancer Risk for Carriers of Germline Mutations inJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025Observational
- CanRisk-GP protocol: A feasibility study of incorporating proactive multifactorial breast cancer risk assessment into general practice.PloS one · 2025Article
- Polygenic score distribution differences across European ancestry populations: implications for breast cancer risk prediction.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Improving the communication of multifactorial cancer risk assessment results for different audiences: a co-design process.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is a growing focus on the development of multi-factorial cancer risk prediction algorithms alongside tools that operationalise them for clinical use. BOADICEA is a breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction model incorporating genetic and other risk factors. A new user-friendly Web-based tool (CanRisk.org) has been developed to apply BOADICEA. This study aimed to explore the acceptability of the prototype CanRisk tool among two healthcare professional groups to inform further development, evaluation and implementation.
methodA multi-methods approach was used. Clinicians from primary care and specialist genetics clinics in England, France and Germany were invited to use the CanRisk prototype with two test cases (either face-to-face with a simulated patient or via a written vignette). Their views about the tool were examined via a semi-structured interview or equivalent open-ended questionnaire. Qualitative data were subjected to thematic analysis and organised around Sekhon's Theoretical Framework of Acceptability.
resultsSeventy-five clinicians participated, 21 from primary care and 54 from specialist genetics clinics. Participants were from England (n = 37), France (n = 23) and Germany (n = 15). The prototype CanRisk tool was generally acceptable to most participants due to its intuitive design. Primary care clinicians were concerned about the amount of time needed to complete, interpret and communicate risk information. Clinicians from both settings were apprehensive about the impact of the CanRisk tool on their consultations and lack of opportunities to interpret risk scores before sharing them with their patients.
conclusionsThe findings highlight the challenges associated with developing a complex tool for use in different clinical settings; they also helped refine the tool. This prototype may not have been versatile enough for clinical use in both primary care and specialist genetics clinics where the needs of clinicians are different, emphasising the importance of understanding the clinical context when developing cancer risk assessment tools.
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.