ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Measuring the therapeutic bond in genetic counseling: Testing measurement error in the bond subscale of the Working Alliance Inventory.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward a therapeutic relationship: A randomized control trial of the physical environment and client-centered communication in genetic counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Trial
- Measuring the therapeutic bond in genetic counseling: Testing measurement error in the bond subscale of the Working Alliance Inventory.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The therapeutic relationship is a key component of successful genetic counseling. In psychotherapy, a strong therapeutic relationship can improve patient health outcomes and a poor relationship can worsen psychological functioning. Investigation of the therapeutic relationship in genetic counseling has shown evidence for a similar pattern. Reliable measurement of the therapeutic relationship is necessary for consistency across studies in the genetic counseling context. One measure that has been adapted for use in genetic counseling is the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). However, there have been no studies of the factor structure or item-level method bias analyses for the genetic counseling-adapted version of the WAI. The goal of this study was to test the factor structure of the WAI observer version (WAI-O) bond subscale and assess method bias in a genetic counseling context. We hypothesized that differences in factor structures would exist for items that were positively (n = 9) versus negatively (n = 3) worded (reverse coded). Secondary data analysis was performed on two data sets that utilized the WAI-O in genetic counseling contexts. Data set 1 used simulated genetic counseling sessions that were judged by analog clients recruited through crowdsourcing platforms (N = 861). Data set 2 was conducted with genetic counseling clients, and sessions were evaluated by a research team (N = 120). Principal axis factor analysis with oblique oblimin rotation supported a two-factor solution for the WAI-O bond subscale across data sets. Items factored based on wording, with the positively worded items loading together and the negatively worded items loading on the second factor. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the removal of all negatively worded items from the instrument across data sets. Results suggest that the negatively worded items on the WAI-O may be capturing a construct inconsistent with the positively worded items and support rewording and/or excluding them from use for a more reliable measure of the therapeutic bond.
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.