Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42619412›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026

Population Genomic Screening for Hereditary Cancer Risk: Patient Experience, Perceptions, and Downstream Clinical Outcomes.

Sarah English, Libby Malphrus, Samantha Norman, Nathaniel L Baker, Daniel P Judge, Ingrid Wagner, Caitlin G Allen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Sarah EnglishCollege of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Libby MalphrusCollege of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Samantha NormanDepartment of Genetics and Genomics, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Nathaniel L BakerDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Daniel P JudgeCollege of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.
Ingrid WagnerDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-8334-6192
Caitlin G AllenDepartment of Implementation Science, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6288-3529

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population-wide genomic screening (PWGS) offers a novel approach to identifying individuals at risk for hereditary cancer conditions such as Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) Syndrome and Lynch Syndrome (LS). However, limited data exist on patient experiences and clinical outcomes following result disclosure. This study evaluated participant data from In Our DNA SC, a PWGS initiative offering free, CLIA-certified genomic screening and genetic counseling. We analyzed survey and electronic medical record data of participants who received a clinically actionable result for HBOC or LS and who agreed to post-test genetic counseling. Surveys were administered at three time points: pre-counseling, 30-days post-counseling, and 6-months post-counseling. Of 260 invited, 52 participants completed the full survey series. Over half of participants (55.5%) reported being surprised by their genetic test result. Overall satisfaction with the return of results was high (mean > 4.5/5). Most emotional and cognitive responses did not differ significantly between groups, however, participants with LS were significantly more likely to report feeling calm/comfortable, whereas participants with HBOC reported thinking about their results more often. Most participants engaged in follow-up risk management: 80.8% discussed results with providers, 69.2% completed screening, and 51.9% were referred to specialists. Overall, findings support the feasibility and acceptability of PWGS in unselected populations. Future research should investigate the need for tailored support and strategies to reduce attrition to guide implementation of subsequent PWGS initiatives.

Indexed as

Colorectal Neoplasms, Hereditary NonpolyposisGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReturn of Individual Research Resultsclinical outcomesgenetic counselinghereditary cancer syndromespatient experiencepopulation‐wide genomic screening

Identifiers

PMID42619412
PMCPMC13490966

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.