ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Differences in Willingness to Undergo
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital and Coaching Interventions for Uptake of Cancer Genetic Testing: The MiGHT Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2026Trial
- Willingness to contribute monetarily for hereditary breast cancer risk testing and the influencing factors: The first Indonesian exploration in the province with the highest prevalence.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2026Article
- Psychosocial predictors of hereditary cancer genetic testing motivation in untested individuals.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Impact of barriers and motivators on intention and confidence to undergo hereditary cancer genetic testing.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Primary Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Strategies in East and Southeast Asia.Cancers · 2025Review
- Risk-reducing decisions regarding germlineJournal of medical genetics · 2024Article
- Risk-Reducing Breast and Gynecological Surgery for BRCA Mutation Carriers: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
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
Abstract
We aimed to understand the decision-making process related to the willingness to undergo BRCA1/2 genetic testing, risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO), or risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) among the general public, cancer patients, and healthcare professionals in South Korea. In total, 3444 individuals (1496 from the general public, 1500 cancer patients, 108 clinicians, and 340 researchers) completed a survey addressing genetic testing and related risk management options in a hypothetical scenario. Differences in intent and associated factors for undergoing the above procedures or sharing test results were analyzed. Overall, 67% of participants were willing to undergo BRCA1/2 testing, with proportions of the general public (58%), cancer patients (70%), clinicians (88%), and researchers (90%). The willingness to undergo RRSO was highest among clinicians (58%), followed by among patients (38%), the general public (33%), and researchers (32%) (p < 0.001). Gender, age, education level, and household income were associated with willingness to undergo genetic testing, RRM, and RRSO (p < 0.05). The intent for undergo genetic testing, RRM, and RRSO were affected by many factors. Finally, 69% of the general public intended to share information with family, while this percentage was 92%, 91%, and 94% for patients, clinicians, and researchers, respectively (p < 0.05). These results highlight the requirement for developing targeted educational materials and counseling strategies for facilitating informed decision making.
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.