Observational studyEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2022
Assessment of psychosocial difficulties by genetic clinicians and distress in women at high risk of breast cancer: a prospective study.
Observational study in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04145817 (Clinical Application of the European Horizon 2020 Research Project "BRIDGES" - Study of the Psychological Impact of Breast Cancer Risk Communication in Cancer Genetics Based on the Personalized Estimation of the BOADICEA V5/PLUS Model), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 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.
Clinical Application of the European Horizon 2020 Research Project "BRIDGES" - Study of the Psychological Impact of Breast Cancer Risk Communication in Cancer Genetics Based on the Personalized Estimation of the BOADICEA V5/PLUS Model
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic services in Pakistan: a review highlighting limitations and opportunities for improvement.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Characterizing psychosocial assessments across genetic counseling sessions through qualitative content analysis.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Familial Patterns in Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Lessons From Three Siblings.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Psychosocial Impacts of Prophylactic Total Gastrectomy for Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer: A Narrative Review.Psycho-oncology · 2025Review
- Psychological Well-Being in Breast Cancer: A Literature Review of the Impact of Precision Oncology and Radiogenomics.Cureus · 2025Review
- Assessing and attending to psychosocial concerns in genetic counseling: Proposing the BATHE method.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Article
- Factors associated with psychological distress during genetic counseling in high-risk women with breast cancer in Turkey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- The history of families at-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: what are the impacts of genetic counseling and testing?Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Guidelines, guidelines everywhere-and still I'm not sure what to do.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined how often genetic clinicians correctly identify psychosocial difficulties in women at high breast cancer risk and explored effects of this assessment and the genetic test result on counselees' distress. A prospective observational study of counselee-clinician dyads was performed in three French, German and Spanish genetic clinics, involving 709 counselees (participation rate, 83.4%) and 31 clinicians (participation rate, 100%). Counselee-clinician agreement in perceived psychosocial difficulties was measured after the pre-test genetic consultation. Multivariate mixed linear models accounting for clinicians were tested. Predicted distress levels were assessed after the pre- (T1) and post-test result disclosure consultations (T2). Depending on the difficulty domain, clinicians adequately assessed the presence or absence of difficulties in 51% ("familial issues") to 59% ("emotions") of counselees. When counselees' and clinicians' perceptions disagreed, difficulties were generally underestimated by clinicians. Counselees' distress levels remained stable from T1 to T2, irrespective of clinicians' appraisal adequacy, and the genetic test result disclosure. Psychological referral need were found in 20-42% of counselees, more frequently observed for difficulties in the "emotions" domain. Our findings suggest that the genetic test result is a suboptimal indicator for psychological referral. Instead, clinicians should focus on emotions expressed by counselees to appraise their needs for psychological support.
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.