Trial reportJCO oncology practice2025
Video Education Is an Acceptable Alternative to Pretest Genetic Counseling for Patients With Breast, Ovarian, Pancreatic, and Metastatic Prostate Cancer: Results From a Randomized Study.
Trial report in JCO oncology practice, 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.
- Evaluating the Feasibility of Educational Videos in a Medical Oncology Sarcoma Clinic to Improve Patient Knowledge and Satisfaction.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Video Education in Germline Genetic Testing: A Step Toward Improved Access to Personalized Medicine.JCO oncology practice · 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith increased demand for cancer genetic testing (GT), providers are exploring alternative service delivery models such as video education (VE). We compare the uptake of GT among 250 patients with breast, ovarian, pancreatic, or metastatic prostate cancer randomly assigned to receive either pretest VE or a pretest visit with a genetic counselor (GC). MATERIALS AND
methodsUsing a 3:1 ratio, 187 patients were randomly assigned to the VE arm and 63 patients to the GC arm. GT was arranged after participants either watched an informative video (VE arm) or met with a GC (GC arm). Satisfaction, knowledge, distress, decisional regret, and family communication were assessed as secondary study end points.
resultsParticipants were age 39-88 years with no significant demographic differences between the two arms. In the VE arm, 170 (90.95%) participants completed GT versus 49 (77.8%) in the GC arm (
conclusionIn this study, there was high acceptance of VE and it led to better GT uptake compared with the GC arm. However, it will be important for programs using VE to build-in more opportunities for patients to ask questions. Pretest VE is a viable option for patients with cancer who need their germline genetic test results to help guide surgical and medical decisions.
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.