ArticleJournal of community genetics2022
Increased family history documentation in internal medicine resident continuity clinic at a community hospital through resident-led structured genetic education program.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Innovative Strategy for Collecting Family Health History: An Effectiveness-Implementation Trial in Primary Care Clinics.Annals of family medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aim to assess residents' perspectives and clinical utility of obtaining family history (FH) as well as to improve the rate of FH documentation in electronic medical record (EMR) at an internal medicine resident continuity clinic at a community hospital. The residents' perspectives were assessed with questionnaires. The study period was divided into the first 10-week Phase 1 in which genetic education interventions were delivered by residents, and the second 10-week Phase 2 with minimal intervention. FH documentation in EMR was reviewed and compared to a 4-week baseline (Phase 0). We found that time constraint was the most reported barrier. We reviewed 1197 patient visits; FH was recorded in 34% (67/200), 52% (272/522), and 50% (239/475) during Phase 0, Phase1, and Phase 2, respectively. Genetic education significantly increased the rate of FH documentation in Phase 1 from baseline, which was maintained in Phase 2 despite removal of interventions. The mean age of patients with documented FH was younger than those without documentation (48 years vs 51 years; p < 0.001). Documented FH of cancers and coronary artery disease lacked important details, such as age at diagnosis, in 62% (86/138) and 51% (41/81) of them, respectively. Out of 511 patients that had documented FH, we identified 66 patients (13%) where positive family history could alter medical management. In conclusion, resident-led structured genetic education effectively increased family history documentation in EMR in internal medicine resident continuity clinic and showed clinical utility.
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.