Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37395995›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in health services2023

Patient decision support resources inform decisions about cancer susceptibility genetic testing and risk management: a systematic review of patient impact and experience.

Kelly Kohut, Kate Morton, Lesley Turner, Jonathan Shepherd, Vicky Fenerty, Lois Woods, Chloe Grimmett, Diana M Eccles, Claire Foster

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in health services, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Kelly KohutCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer: CentRIC, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Kate MortonCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer: CentRIC, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Lesley TurnerCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer: CentRIC, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Jonathan ShepherdSouthampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Vicky FenertyEngagement Services, University of Southampton Library, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Lois WoodsSouthampton Health Technology Assessments Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Chloe GrimmettCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer: CentRIC, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Diana M EcclesFaculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Claire FosterCentre for Psychosocial Research in Cancer: CentRIC, School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Patients with genetic cancer susceptibility are presented with complex management options involving difficult decisions, for example about genetic testing, treatment, screening and risk-reducing surgery/medications. This review sought to explore the experience of patients using decision support resources in this context, and the impact on decision-making outcomes. Methods: Systematic review of quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies involving adults with or without cancer who used a decision support resource pre- or post-genetic test for any cancer susceptibility. To gather a broad view of existing resources and gaps for development, digital or paper-based patient resources were included and not limited to decision aids. Narrative synthesis was used to summarise patient impact and experience. Results: Thirty-six publications describing 27 resources were included. Heterogeneity of resources and outcome measurements highlighted the multiple modes of resource delivery and personal tailoring acceptable to and valued by patients. Impact on cognitive, emotional, and behavioural outcomes was mixed, but mainly positive. Findings suggested clear potential for quality patient-facing resources to be acceptable and useful. Conclusions: Decision support resources about genetic cancer susceptibility are likely useful to support decision-making, but should be co-designed with patients according to evidence-based frameworks. More research is needed to study impact and outcomes, particularly in terms of longer term follow-up to identify whether patients follow through on decisions and whether any increased distress is transient. Innovative, streamlined resources are needed to scale up delivery of genetic cancer susceptibility testing for patients with cancer in mainstream oncology clinics. Tailored patient-facing decision aids should also be made available to patients identified as carriers of a pathogenic gene variant that increases future cancer risks, to complement traditional genetic counselling. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020220460, identifier: CRD42020220460.

Indexed as

cancer geneticsdecision supportgenetic counsellingpatient decision aidshared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID37395995
PMCPMC10311450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.