ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Advancing towards clear and patient-centred language in cancer genetics.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Person-First or Disease-First? Language Choices in Cancer Communication.Nursing reports (Pavia, Italy) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Language in clinical genetics is never neutral. The terms used to describe genetic concepts, like mutation or variant, sporadic or hereditary, patient or counselee not only shape scientific discourse but also profoundly affect how individuals understand their risks, experience counselling, and make decisions. Terminology carries ethical weight, influencing perceptions of identity, stigma, and inclusion. Precision and empathy in language are therefore central to ethical and effective care. We propose the use of consistent terminology in communication that integrates three ethical responsibilities, promoting inclusivity through careful terminology, fostering psychosocial awareness by recognising that words can evoke fear or stigma, or offer reassurance and communicative clarity. This can be achieved by standardising professional terminology (e.g., variant, sporadic/hereditary) while co-constructing meaning with counselees. We recommend avoiding ambiguous labels like positive or negative, using precise qualifiers for variants and harmonising language across professional disciplines. Communication itself can be a clinical intervention, as careful paraphrasing and clarification both enhance understanding and provide emotional support. As genetic testing becomes increasingly mainstream in oncology, empathetic, precise, and patient-centred communication is essential. By fostering clarity and reducing stigma, language can support informed decision-making, trust, and ultimately, the ethical integration of genetics into everyday healthcare.
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.