Literature DB >> 20119651

"I have always believed I was at high risk..." The role of expectation in emotional responses to the receipt of an average, moderate or high cancer genetic risk assessment result: a thematic analysis of free-text questionnaire comments.

J Hilgart1, C Phelps, P Bennett, K Hood, K Brain, A Murray.   

Abstract

It is well-recognised that receipt of cancer genetic risk information can evoke a mix of both positive and negative emotional responses. Objective risk itself is not necessarily predictive of emotional response to receipt of risk information and the Cue Adaptive Reasoning Account (CARA; Renner, 2004) suggests that that the degree to which level of risk is consistent with expectations may influence emotional responses. This paper reports a thematic analysis of the free-text data structured around responses to the three risk labels: average, moderate or high. Data is reported from both 123 women and 15 men, including those with a past or current cancer diagnosis. Reactions to risk information appear to be dependent upon participants' pre-conceived expectations about their level of cancer risk. Many average risk respondents questioned the accuracy of their result, whereas high risk information was often expected. Findings are discussed in relation to the CARA model and clinical implications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20119651     DOI: 10.1007/s10689-010-9324-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fam Cancer        ISSN: 1389-9600            Impact factor:   2.375


  23 in total

1.  Biased reasoning: adaptive responses to health risk feedback.

Authors:  Britta Renner
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2004-03

2.  Factors associated with intrusive cancer-related worries in women undergoing cancer genetic risk assessment.

Authors:  Paul Bennett; Clare Wilkinson; Jim Turner; Rhiannon Tudor Edwards; Barbara France; Gethin Griffith; Gethin Griffin; Jonathon Gray
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2008-11-15       Impact factor: 2.375

3.  To be or not to be at risk: spontaneous reactions to risk information.

Authors:  Martina Panzer; Britta Renner
Journal:  Psychol Health       Date:  2008

4.  'Coming down the line'-- patients' understanding of their family history of common chronic disease.

Authors:  Fiona M Walter; Jon Emery
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.166

5.  Genetic counseling outcomes: perceived risk and distress after counseling for hereditary colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Ann-Marie Codori; Tracy Waldeck; Gloria M Petersen; Diana Miglioretti; Jill D Trimbath; Miriam A Tillery
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Cancer genetic predisposition: information needs of patients irrespective of risk level.

Authors:  Alison Metcalfe; Julie Werrett; Lucy Burgess; Cyril Chapman; Collette Clifford
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-06-11       Impact factor: 2.375

7.  Understanding why negative genetic test results sometimes fail to reassure.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Jonathan A Smith; Victoria Senior; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2003-06-15       Impact factor: 2.802

8.  Colon cancer: risk perceptions and risk communication.

Authors:  Neil D Weinstein; Kathy Atwood; Elaine Puleo; Robert Fletcher; Graham Colditz; Karen M Emmons
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb

9.  The impact of genetic counselling about breast cancer risk on women's risk perceptions and levels of distress.

Authors:  A Cull; E D Anderson; S Campbell; J Mackay; E Smyth; M Steel
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  A randomized trial of specialist genetic assessment: psychological impact on women at different levels of familial breast cancer risk.

Authors:  K Brain; P Norman; J Gray; C Rogers; R Mansel; P Harper
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2002-01-21       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  9 in total

1.  Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing.

Authors:  David J Kaufman; Juli M Bollinger; Rachel L Dvoskin; Joan A Scott
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Effects of genetic and environmental risk assessment feedback on colorectal cancer screening adherence.

Authors:  Ronald E Myers; Karen Ruth; Sharon L Manne; James Cocroft; Randa Sifri; Barry Ziring; Desiree Burgh; Eric Ross; David S Weinberg
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2015-03-18

Review 3.  How do women who are informed that they are at increased risk of breast cancer appraise their risk? A systematic review of qualitative research.

Authors:  Victoria G Woof; Anthony Howell; Lorna McWilliams; D Gareth Evans; David P French
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2022-08-24       Impact factor: 9.075

4.  Lack of reassurance after unexpected positive health risk feedback - an analysis of temporal dynamics.

Authors:  Josianne Kollmann; Fridtjof W Nussbeck; Nadine C Lages; Luka J Debbeler; Harald T Schupp; Britta Renner
Journal:  Health Psychol Behav Med       Date:  2021-04-13

5.  Effect of interventions including provision of personalised cancer risk information on accuracy of risk perception and psychological responses: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Max Bayne; Madi Fairey; Barbora Silarova; Simon J Griffin; Stephen J Sharp; William M P Klein; Stephen Sutton; Juliet A Usher-Smith
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2019-08-11

6.  "Who Doesn't Like Receiving Good News?" Perspectives of Individuals Who Received Genomic Screening Results by Mail.

Authors:  Annika T Beck; Erica J Sutton; Carolyn P Y Chow; Susan H Curtis; Iftikhar J Kullo; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-04-21

7.  Clinical follow-up and breast and ovarian cancer screening of true BRCA1/2 noncarriers: a qualitative investigation.

Authors:  Sylvie Pelletier; Nora Wong; Zaki El Haffaf; William D Foulkes; Jocelyne Chiquette; Pavel Hamet; Jacques Simard; Michel Dorval
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-11-05       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Short-term psychological impact of the BRCA1/2 test result in women with breast cancer according to their perceived probability of genetic predisposition to cancer.

Authors:  A Brédart; J L Kop; A Depauw; O Caron; S Sultan; D Leblond; A Fajac; B Buecher; M Gauthier-Villars; C Noguès; C Flahault; D Stoppa-Lyonnet; S Dolbeault
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Experience of BRCA1/2 mutation-negative young women from families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Lynn Macrae; Alicia Navarro de Souza; Carmen G Loiselle; Nora Wong
Journal:  Hered Cancer Clin Pract       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 2.857

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.