ArticleJCO oncology practice2026
Translating Cancer Genetics Care: Digital Tools to Improve Cancer Genetics Risk Assessment for Patients With Limited English Proficiency.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study assessed the acceptability of a multilingual, digital cancer genetics risk assessment (CGRA) tool among patients with limited English proficiency at linguistically diverse, urban gynecology clinics. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients presenting for gynecology appointments who spoke English, Spanish, or Chinese (Mandarin/Cantonese) were offered at check-in to complete a digital CGRA tool available in their preferred language. A convenience sample of 35 patients was selected per language group. The digital tool used patient-reported personal and family health histories to determine genetic testing eligibility based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Primary outcomes were patient interest and completion of the digital tool across language groups. Patient interest in completing genetic testing following completion of the digital tool was not measured. Patient interest and completion of the digital tool were compared based on language, using chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to explore the effect of language, adjusting for other patient-related factors.
resultsOf the 105 patients offered the digital tool, 68 (64.8%) initiated the digital tool, among whom 51 (75.0%) completed it. The median age was 46.0 years (IQR, 37-58 years). No significant differences were found between English-speaking and Spanish-speaking patients (interest: 80.0%
conclusionThe digital CGRA tool was acceptable to 65% of patients. Spanish-speaking patients showed similar interest and completion rates as English speakers, whereas Chinese-speaking patients had lower interest and completion rates.
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.