Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32595144›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Implementation of interventions targeting the uptake of genetic testing services for breast cancer risk: protocol for a systematic review.

Subash Thapa, Anja Leppin, Rikke Kristensen, Mette Just Bonde, Arja R Aro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Subash ThapaResearch Unit of General Practice, University of Southern Denmark, J.B. Winsløws Vej 9, 5000 Odense, Denmark sthapa@health.sdu.dk.ORCID 0000-0002-1182-8511
Anja LeppinUnit for Health Promotion Research, University of Southern Denmark, Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10, 6700 Esbjerg, Denmark.
Rikke KristensenUnit for Health Promotion Research, University of Southern Denmark, Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10, 6700 Esbjerg, Denmark.
Mette Just BondeUnit for Health Promotion Research, University of Southern Denmark, Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10, 6700 Esbjerg, Denmark.
Arja R AroUnit for Health Promotion Research, University of Southern Denmark, Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10, 6700 Esbjerg, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe timely identification of breast cancer-related pathogenic variants can help to identify the risk of potential disease development and determine healthcare choices. However, the uptake rate of genetic testing services for breast cancer risk remains low in many countries. Interventions targeting the uptake of these services among individuals potentially at risk for inherited breast cancer are often complex and have multiple components, and are therefore difficult to implement, replicate and disseminate to new contexts. Our aim is to systematically review studies targeting the uptake of genetic testing services for breast cancer risk and critically assess the quality of implementation outcomes and the reporting of intervention descriptions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane Library and all Campbell Coordinating Group databases will be searched for intervention studies that target individuals' participation in breast cancer genetic testing programmes. Papers published in English within the time period from January 2005 until October 2019 will be considered for inclusion. Titles, abstracts and full papers will be screened for eligibility by two pairs of reviewers independently. For data analysis and synthesis, study-level and intervention-level characteristics will be abstracted. We will present all implementation outcomes that are mentioned in each of the studies and register the number of studies that do not at all look at or report implementation outcomes. The quality of implementation will be checked using a 5-point rubric item, and the quality and completeness of reporting of intervention description will be evaluated using the 12-item Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required to conduct this review. Review findings will be disseminated to academic and non-specialist audiences via peer-reviewed academic journals and presented at appropriate conferences, workshops and meetings to policymakers, practitioners and organisations that work with our population of interest. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018105732.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingPatient Acceptance of Health CareBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansResearch DesignRiskSystematic Reviews as Topiccancer geneticsinternational health servicesquality in health care

Identifiers

PMID32595144
PMCPMC7322324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.