ArticleFamilial cancer2022
Positive experiences of healthcare professionals with a mainstreaming approach of germline genetic testing for women with ovarian cancer.
Article in Familial cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nursing roles, competencies, and education in precision oncology: a scoping review.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Review
- Nurses' Genomic Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Organizational Support: A Comparative Secondary Analysis of Genetics and Genomics in Nursing Practice Survey Data.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2026Article
- Barriers and facilitators for medical oncologists in the further implementation of mainstream genetic testing in breast cancer care in the Netherlands.Familial cancer · 2025Article
- Experience of urologists, oncologists and nurse practitioners with mainstream genetic testing in metastatic prostate cancer.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Article
- A qualitative study to evaluate the preparedness of community paediatricians for genomic medicine in England - ready for take-off?Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Exploring healthcare personnel's knowledge, barriers, and innovative approaches in personalised oncology medicine: a scoping review.Critical public health · 2025Review
- Optimizing the detection of hereditary predisposition in women with epithelial ovarian cancer: nationwide implementation of the Tumor-First workflow.Familial cancer · 2024Review
- Universal Genetic Testing for Newly Diagnosed Invasive Breast Cancer.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Delivering Genetic Test Results for Parkinson Disease: A Qualitative Approach to Provider Experiences in the PD GENEration Study.Neurology. Clinical practice · 2024Article
- Mainstreaming in parallel with ovarian cancer tumor testing to improve genetic testing uptake.Gynecologic oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Adherence to NCCN Genetic Testing Guidelines in Pancreatic Cancer and Impact on Treatment.The oncologist · 2023Article
- Surgical Oncologists and Nurses in Breast Cancer Care are Ready to Provide Pre-Test Genetic Counseling.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
- UK consensus recommendations for clinical management of cancer risk for women with germline pathogenic variants in cancer predisposition genes:Journal of medical genetics · 2023Article
- Prevalence and clinical implications of germline mutations among Jordanian patients with ovarian cancer. The Jordanian exploratory cancer genetics (Jo-ECAG) ovarian study.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2023Article
- A pilot study investigating feasibility of mainstreaming germline BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing in high-risk patients with breast and/or ovarian cancer in three tertiary Cancer Centres in Ireland.Familial cancer · 2023Article
- Healthcare professionals' perspectives on implementation of universal tumor DNA testing in ovarian cancer patients: multidisciplinary focus groups.Familial cancer · 2023Article
- Mainstreaming germline genetic testing for patients with pancreatic cancer increases uptake.Familial cancer · 2023Article
- Mainstream germline genetic testing in men with metastatic prostate cancer: design and protocol for a multicenter observational study.BMC cancer · 2022Article
- Mainstream genetic testing for women with ovarian cancer provides a solid basis for patients to make a well-informed decision about genetic testing.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to current guidelines, all women with epithelial ovarian cancer are eligible for genetic testing for BRCA germline pathogenic variants. Unfortunately, not all affected women are tested. We evaluated the acceptability and feasibility for non-genetic healthcare professionals to incorporate germline genetic testing into their daily practice. We developed and implemented a mainstreaming pathway, including a training module, in collaboration with various healthcare professionals and patient organizations. Healthcare professionals from 4 different hospitals were invited to participate. After completing the training module, gynecologic oncologists, gynecologists with a subspecialty training in oncology, and nurse specialists discussed and ordered genetic testing themselves. They received a questionnaire before completing the training module and 6 months after working according to the new pathway. We assessed healthcare professionals' attitudes, perceived knowledge, and self-efficacy, along with the feasibility of this new mainstream workflow in clinical practice, and evaluated the use and content of the training module. The participation rate for completing the training module was 90% (N = 19/21). At baseline and after 6 months, healthcare professionals had a positive attitude, high perceived knowledge and high self-efficacy toward discussing and ordering genetic testing. Knowledge had increased significantly after 6 months. The training module was rated with an average of 8.1 out of 10 and was considered useful. The majority of healthcare professionals (9/15) was able to discuss a genetic test in five to 10 min. After completion of a training module, non-genetic healthcare professionals feel motivated and competent to discuss and order genetic testing themselves.
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.