Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40684177›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2025

Implementing a chatbot to promote hereditary breast & ovarian cancer genetic screening in women's health: identifying barriers and facilitators to screening adoption.

Easton N Wollney, Shireen Madani Sims, Luisel J Ricks-Santi, Elizabeth Eddy, Daniel Wiesman, Carla L Fisher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

6 authors.

Easton N WollneyDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. easton.wollney@ufl.edu.
Shireen Madani SimsDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Luisel J Ricks-SantiBiomedical and Translational Sciences, Macon and Joan Brock Virginia Health Sciences at Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA.
Elizabeth EddyDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Daniel WiesmanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Carla L FisherDepartment of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.

Funding

NCATS NIH HHS NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo promote genetic screening among women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommends that risk assessment be integrated into practice. Chatbots like the Genetic Information Assistant (Gia®) are increasingly implemented to expand access to hereditary genetic screening. Factors that impact chatbot implementation for HBOC risk screening and women's uptake are not fully realized. To refine implementation strategies prior to full scale implementation, we sought to identify women's perceived facilitators/barriers to adopting Gia screening in a rural population within a large healthcare system in the southern United States.

methodsWe recruited both women who agreed to screen using Gia (and then recommended for genetic testing based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines) as well as women who opted not to do the screen from three Women's Health clinics (OB/GYN) in a northern rural region of Florida. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 17 women (nine adopted the screen, eight did not). We conducted a thematic analysis to identify and further define barriers/facilitators to women's uptake of Gia for HBOC cancer risk screening in obstetrics/gynecology care.

resultsWomen identified six factors that inhibited and/or facilitated their willingness to use Gia for screening: 1) cancer risk perception, 2) communication with their clinician, 3) feasibility of screening, 4) fiscal and insurance concerns, 5) technology trust/distrust, and 6) previous genetic testing experience. Findings illustrate how each factor functioned as a facilitator and/or barrier in women's uptake (e.g., technology being trusted for accuracy versus concerns for data privacy and security).

conclusionsWhile chatbots can extend women's cancer risk screening access, particularly in rural regions and with college-educated women, systems-level (cost) and individual-level factors (perceived risk, misconceptions about repeating genetic testing) should be addressed to promote adoption. Women's interaction with a clinician may be a key implementation strategy for addressing these factors to personalize the screening opportunity and promote their chatbot screening adoption.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerGenetic TestingOvarian NeoplasmsAdultAgedFemaleFloridaGenerative Artificial IntelligenceGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansInterviews as TopicMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRural PopulationWomen's HealthCancer riskChatbotGenetic screeningHealthcare communicationHereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC)ImplementationObstetrics/gynecology (OB/GYN)

Identifiers

PMID40684177
PMCPMC12276685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.