SynthesisPloS one2021
Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of consumers' knowledge, attitudes and experiences of primary health professionals' role in genomic medicine.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Pooled it
- What is the power of a genomic multidisciplinary team approach? A systematic review of implementation and sustainability.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Pooled it
- Bridging the gap between guidelines and practice: genetic counseling uptake and barriers in patients with ovarian malignancies.BMC women's health · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators in Diagnostic Pathways That Align Universal Tumor Screening and Mainstream Genetic Testing for Lynch Syndrome in Colorectal Cancer: Protocol for a Scoping Review With a Narrative Synthesis.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Molecular insights into trauma: A framework of epigenetic pathways to resilience through intervention.Med (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Review
- Optimizing Mainstreaming of Genetic Testing in Parallel With Ovarian and Endometrial Cancer Tumor Testing: How Do We Maximize Our Impact?JCO precision oncology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of an environmental scan-based approach to collecting information about factors impacting cancer genetics services in Latin American countries.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Universal genetic counseling in breast cancer patients significantly improves overall testing rates and improves completion rates in subpopulations.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Genomics in nephrology: identifying informatics opportunities to improve diagnosis of genetic kidney disorders using a human-centered design approach.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Retrospective chart analysis to determine the impact of a patient-facing digital risk stratification tool combined with a clinical screener for hereditary cancer genetic risk assessment triage in a community oncology clinic.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Consumer-oriented (patient and family) outcomes from nursing in genomics: a scoping review of the literature (2012-2022).Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- A mainstreaming oncogenomics model: improving the identification of Lynch syndrome.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Examining interprofessional collaboration in oncogenetic service delivery models for hereditary cancers: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Precision medicine in Australia: now is the time to get it right.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Article
- Interventions to improve delivery of cancer genetics services in the United States: A scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Article
- Views and experiences of palliative care clinicians in addressing genetics with individuals and families: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Protocol to evaluate a pilot program to upskill clinicians in providing genetic testing for familial melanoma.PloS one · 2022Article
- Attitudes of Australian dermatologists on the use of genetic testing: A cross-sectional survey with a focus on melanoma.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntegration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncology.
methodsThe search strategy results were reported using the PRISMA statement and four electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included routine genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer or uptake after universal tumour screening for colorectal or endometrial cancer. The titles and abstracts were reviewed and the full text articles screened for eligibility. Data extraction was preformed using a designed template and study appraisal was assessed using an adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were mapped to Proctor's et al outcomes and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and qualitatively synthesised.
resultsTwenty-seven studies, published up to May 2020, met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies ranged from poor (72%), fair to good (28%) quality. Most interventions identified were complex (multiple components) such as; patient or health professional education, interdisciplinary practice and a documentation or system change. Forty-eight percent of studies with complex interventions demonstrated on average a 35% increase in access to genetic counselling and a 15% increase in testing completion. Mapping of study outcomes showed that 70% and 32% of the studies aligned with either the service and client or the implementation level outcome and 96% to the process or inner setting domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.
conclusionExisting evidence suggests that complex interventions have a potentially positive effect towards genetic counselling and testing completion rates in oncology services. Studies of sound methodological quality that explore a greater breadth of pre and post implementation outcomes and informed by theory are needed. Such research could inform future service delivery models for the integration of genetics into oncology services.
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.