ArticleContemporary clinical trials2021
Design of a study to implement population-based risk assessment for hereditary cancer genetic testing in primary care.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of primary care-based risk assessment and hereditary cancer genetic testing.BMC primary care · 2025Trial
- Strategies to Assess Risk for Hereditary Cancer in Primary Care Clinics: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Social vulnerability and genetic service utilization among unaffected BRIDGE trial patients with inherited cancer susceptibility.BMC cancer · 2025Trial
- Cancer genetic testing uptake in the primary care setting: Patient perspectives on barriers and facilitators throughout the testing process.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Patient-reported actions following receipt of pathogenic hereditary cancer genetic test results: results from a population-based screening study in primary care.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Interest in Genetic Testing for Hereditary Cancer Risk: Associations with Genetic Familiarity, Self-Efficacy, and Sociodemographics.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Improving genetics equity: identifying women eligible for genetic care services using mammography clinics in underserved areas as screening hubs.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Primary care provider practices, attitudes, and confidence with hereditary cancer risk assessment and testing: A mixed methods study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Variability in conceptualizations and measurement of genetic literacy.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic Status and Interest in Genetic Testing in a US-Based Sample.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Barriers, interventions, and recommendations: Improving the genetic testing landscape.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Article
- Delivering Genetic Testing for Patients with Prostate Cancer: Moving Beyond Provider Knowledge as a Barrier to Care.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Identifying patients with high genetic risk for cancer has important clinical ramifications, but hereditary cancer risk is often not identified because of testing barriers at both the provider and patient level. It is unknown how to best implement appropriate genetic testing and follow-up care into an operating primary care clinic. Implementation studies to date have been conducted in high resourced facilities under optimal conditions, often not at the clinic level. This study aims to compare and evaluate two population-wide engagement strategies for identifying members of a primary care clinic's population with a family or personal history of cancer and offering high-risk individuals genetic testing for cancer susceptibility mutations. The two engagement strategies are: 1) point of care screening (POC), conducted when a patient is scheduled for an appointment and 2) direct patient engagement (DPE), where outreach provides the patient an opportunity to complete screening online on their own time. The study will identify changes, problems, and inefficiencies in clinical flow during and after the implementation of risk assessment and genomic testing for cancer risk across primary care clinics. It will also evaluate the effects of the two engagement strategies on patient, provider, and clinic leader outcomes, including perceptions of benefits, harms, and satisfaction with the engagement strategy and process of cancer risk assessment and genetic testing, across gender, racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and genetic literacy divides. Finally, the study will evaluate the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of each engagement strategy.
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.