ArticleFamilial cancer2026
Misinterpreting the results: patient misconceptions about genetic cancer risk after obstetrical carrier screening.
Article in Familial cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obstetric carrier screening (OCS) is recommended for all individuals during pregnancy by leading professional societies. However, patient understanding of the scope and limitations of OCS remains poorly characterized, especially with regards to inclusion of cancer-related genes on OCS panels. This quality improvement initiative evaluated pregnant patients' knowledge of their OCS results. We contacted 100 pregnant patients who had recently completed OCS and participated in a structured telephone interview following physician disclosure of results. When asked about the content of OCS, 52% of patients were unsure or incorrectly believed that cancer-related genes were included on the panel. After clarification of the specific genes and syndromes tested, 73% of patients reported that they would have elected to undergo hereditary cancer screening had it been offered concurrently with OCS. These findings reveal substantial gaps in patient comprehension of OCS and suggest that many pregnant patients incorrectly assume that cancer susceptibility genes are included in their testing. The high level of interest in hereditary cancer screening following clarification underscores pregnancy as a unique window of opportunity to expand access to cancer genetics. Integrating cancer risk assessment into obstetric care may improve uptake of preventive strategies and broaden the impact of genomics on women's health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41706374What 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.