ArticleBMC cancer2026
The clinical and psychosocial consequences of genomic Multi-Cancer Detection (MCD) tests in underserved populations: a scoping review.
Article in BMC 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMulti-cancer detection (MCD) tests currently being tested in clinical trials may be a scalable, convenient means to improve cancer screening, yet little is known about the potential clinical and psychosocial consequences of doing so in underserved communities.
objectiveTo summarize the current literature examining potential clinical and psychosocial outcomes and consequences for MCD testing in underserved populations.
methodsWe searched and then reviewed articles from five databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. For inclusion, studies had to primarily focus on MCD testing within underserved populations. Out of 376 articles identified, 29 met inclusion criteria.
resultsFinancial constraints were the most frequently cited barrier (n = 23). 24 articles mentioned clinical consequences and nine mentioned psychosocial consequences, with the most common being lower rates of cancer screening with proven existing recommended tests (n = 10) and emotional stress, worry, and anxiety (n = 11), respectively. Many expressed concerns about underrepresentation in clinical trials.
conclusionsThe review highlights common potential clinical consequences as well as important factors underserved populations may face if/when MCD testing is implemented in their healthcare. Future prospective studies, experimental and observational, should intentionally include underrepresented patient populations to better understand and address these challenges.
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.