Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32338425›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2020

Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: patient recommendations for improved risk communication.

Samantha Pollard, Steve Kalloger, Deirdre Weymann, Sophie Sun, Jennifer Nuk, Kasmintan A Schrader, Dean A Regier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: patient recommendations for improved risk communication.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    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

7 authors.

Samantha PollardCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3070-2092
Steve KallogerSchool of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1332-7881
Deirdre WeymannCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3072-5657
Sophie SunHereditary Cancer Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Jennifer NukHereditary Cancer Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Kasmintan A SchraderHereditary Cancer Program, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7413-4314
Dean A RegierCanadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control, Cancer Control Research, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-8876-0511

Funding

CIHR PCG-155555
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMulti-gene panel testing is replacing single-gene testing for patients with suspected hereditary cancer syndromes. The detection of a hereditary cancer syndrome allows tested individuals to initiate enhanced primary and secondary prevention efforts-where available-with a view to reduce disease burden. Current policy prevents testing programmes from communicating genetic test results with potentially affected family members, yet it is well documented that tested individuals face multiple challenges in initiating such discussions with relatives.

objectiveIn response to this challenge, we sought patient recommendations about how to improve genetic risk communication to enhance interfamilial discussions about primary and secondary disease prevention.

designWe conducted 25 semi-structured interviews with individuals who received genetic testing through British Columbia's Hereditary Cancer Program between 2017 and 2018. Interviews were professionally transcribed and analysed using a constant comparative approach.

resultsParticipants described difficulty engaging in conversations with relatives who were resistant to receiving genetic risk information, when communicating with younger relatives and where participants reported strained familial relationships. Participants recommended that testing facilities provide a summary of results and implications and that resources be made available to prepare patients for challenging discussions with family members. DISCUSSION: Our study demonstrates that individuals undergoing genetic testing for suspected hereditary cancer syndromes would benefit from additional supportive resources alongside genetic counselling. Providing this on-going support will enhance the accurate and transparent communication of risk to facilitate the uptake of cascade testing and enhanced prevention strategies.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingNeoplastic Syndromes, HereditaryCommunicationFamilyGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansfamily communicationgenetic counsellinggenetic testinghereditary cancer syndromesmedical decision makingrisk communication

Identifiers

PMID32338425
PMCPMC7495068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.