Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32424175›Full record

SynthesisGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2020

Patient experience of uncertainty in cancer genomics: a systematic review.

Nicci Bartley, Christine Napier, Megan Best, Phyllis Butow

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicci BartleySchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. nicole.bartley@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9052-1616
Christine NapierCancer Theme, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, Australia.
Megan BestSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Phyllis ButowSchool of Psychology, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUGarvan Institute of Medical Research · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While genomics provides new clinical opportunities, its complexity generates uncertainties. This systematic review aimed to summarize what is currently known about the experience of uncertainty for adult patients undergoing cancer genomic testing. A search of five databases (2001 to 2018) yielded 6508 records. After removing duplicates, abstract/title screening, and assessment of full articles, ten studies were included for quality appraisal and data extraction. Qualitative studies were subjected to thematic analysis, and quantitative data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Cancer genomic results reduced uncertainty for patients regarding treatment decisions but did not reduce uncertainty in the risk context. Qualitative and quantitative data synthesis revealed four themes: (1) coexisting uncertainties, (2) factors influencing uncertainty, (3) outcomes of uncertainty, and (4) coping with uncertainty. Uncertainty can motivate, or be a barrier to, pursuing cancer genomic testing. Appraisal of uncertainty influences the patient experience of uncertainty, the outcome of uncertainty for patients, as well as the coping strategies utilized. While this systematic review found that appraisal of uncertainty is important to the patients' experience of uncertainty in the cancer genomic context, more mixed methods longitudinal research is needed to address the complexities that contribute to patient uncertainty across the process.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsAdultGenomicsHumansPatient Outcome AssessmentQualitative ResearchUncertaintycancergenomicpatient perspectiveuncertainty

Identifiers

PMID32424175
PMCPMC7462749
OpenAlexW3024829604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.