Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42867866›Full record

Trial reportJAMA network open2026

Digital and Coaching Interventions for Uptake of Cancer Genetic Testing: The MiGHT Randomized Clinical Trial.

Sarah Austin, Emerson Delacroix, John D Rice, Erika Koeppe, Elizabeth Rizzo, Erika N Hanson, Liliana Arida-Moody, Shayna Weiner, Sarah T Hawley, Wendy R Uhlmann and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA network open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05162846 (Methods for Increasing Genetic Testing Uptake in Michigan), which is not on this 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.

NCT05162846 nacompletednot on this map

Methods for Increasing Genetic Testing Uptake in Michigan

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Michigan Rogel Cancer CenterRan2022 to 2025Enrolled793ConditionsBreast Cancer, Colorectal Cancer, Ovarian Cancer, Prostate CancerArmsPublicly available genetic testing resources, Virtual genetics navigator, Motivational interviewing (MI)
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

16 authors.

Sarah AustinDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Emerson DelacroixDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
John D RiceDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor.
Erika KoeppeDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Elizabeth RizzoRogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Erika N HansonDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Liliana Arida-MoodyVanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee.
Shayna WeinerRogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Sarah T HawleyDepartment of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Wendy R UhlmannDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
J Scott RobertsDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Equity, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor.
Versha PleasantDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Katrina R EllisUniversity of Michigan School of Social Work, Ann Arbor.
Jennifer J GriggsDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Ken ResnicowDivision of Epidemiology & Community Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Elena M StoffelDepartment of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Germline genetic testing (GT) for hereditary cancer risk can inform cancer treatment, screening, and prevention, yet testing rates remain low. Alternative strategies are needed to improve facilitation of GT. Objective: To compare 2 patient-level interventions to increase uptake of hereditary cancer GT against usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Michigan Genetic Hereditary Testing (MiGHT) randomized clinical trial analyzed self-reported GT outcome data from participants meeting clinical GT criteria between April 21, 2022, and November 21, 2025. Participants were adults (age ≥18 years) who met national criteria for genetic evaluation and had not previously completed germline GT recruited from oncology, primary care, and gastroenterology practices; research registries; and the general public in Michigan. Data were analyzed from April 30, 2025, to May 1, 2026. Interventions: Participants were randomized to either telephone-based health coaching, a self-directed digital intervention, or usual care. Both interventions incorporated genetics education and motivational interviewing concepts. Main Outcomes and Measures: GT uptake was assessed at 6- and 12-month time points. The primary outcome was completion of GT by 6 months. The effects of study group on GT uptake were evaluated using logistic regression, adjusting for cancer history, age, gender, and race. Results: A total of 793 participants (median [IQR] age, 64 [51-71] years; 458 [57.8%] female) were randomized to health coaching (261 participants), the digital intervention (265 participants), or usual care (267 participants). Overall, 31 participants (4.9%) reported completing GT by the 6-month time point, and 76 participants (9.6%) underwent GT across the 12-month study period. Compared with usual care, participants in the digital intervention group had higher odds of completing GT by 6 months (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 3.88; 97.5% CI, 1.27-14.80), while those in the health coaching group had higher odds of completing GT by 12 months (AOR, 2.25; 97.5% CI, 1.11-4.77). Participants in the digital intervention group were more likely to express intention to test at 6 months (AOR, 2.36; 95% CI, 1.44-3.93), whereas those in the health coaching group had higher intention at both 6 (AOR, 2.99; 95% CI, 1.83-4.95) and 12 (AOR, 2.29; 95% CI 1.29-4.15) months compared with usual care. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of GT interventions, GT uptake was higher among participants who received the digital or health coaching interventions compared with usual care, although overall testing rates were low. These results underscore the importance of content delivery, motivational messaging, and alternative GT care models. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05162846.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingMentoringNeoplasmsPatient Acceptance of Health CareAdherence InterventionsAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMichiganMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID42867866
PMCPMC13662660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.