Literature DB >> 26140846

A Prospective Comparison Study of Different Methods of Gathering Self-Reported Family History Information for Breast Cancer Risk Assessment.

Caroline Benjamin1, Katie Booth, Ian Ellis.   

Abstract

Currently there is much debate regarding the ability of mathematical models incorporating epidemiological information or mutation-based risk algorithms to accurately predict a woman's risk of developing breast cancer. Without access to accurate family history information these models have limited use. This study compares different methods of gathering family history information and the impact on subsequent risk assessment. These methods were compared to the "gold standard" interview with a trained genetics' professional. The amount and accuracy of information provided by primary care doctors' letters was found to be poor and better information was obtained by sending a postal questionnaire directly to the patient. Because of the high number of low-risk women referred to clinic a questionnaire (the FCAT) was designed to provide reassurance and piloted as part of this study. This paper highlights the importance of using appropriate methods to gather the family history information. It presents evidence for the importance of a skilled assessor and the need to allow time for women to discuss the importance of this information with their family.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 26140846     DOI: 10.1023/A:1022611307167

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  27 in total

Review 1.  A systematic review of the literature exploring the role of primary care in genetic services.

Authors:  J Emery; E Watson; P Rose; A Andermann
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.267

2.  Raising concerns about family history of breast cancer in primary care consultations: prospective, population based study. Women's Concerns Study Group.

Authors:  F Hyland; A L Kinmonth; T M Marteau; S Griffin; P Murrell; D Spiegelhalter; C Todd; F Walter; B Berrington; M Bobrow; J Mackay
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-01-06

Review 3.  Uses and abuses of screening tests.

Authors:  David A Grimes; Kenneth F Schulz
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-03-09       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Information needs and sources of information for women with breast cancer: a follow-up study.

Authors:  K A Luker; K Beaver; S J Leinster; R G Owens
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.187

5.  Breast cancer risk assessment: use of complete pedigree information and the effect of misspecified ages at diagnosis of affected relatives.

Authors:  S Schmidt; H Becher; J Chang-Claude
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  1998-03       Impact factor: 4.132

6.  Family history taking and genetic counselling in primary care.

Authors:  P Rose; E Humm; K Hey; L Jones; S M Huson
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.267

7.  A preliminary validation of a family history assessment form to select women at risk for breast or ovarian cancer for referral to a genetics center.

Authors:  C A Gilpin; N Carson; A G Hunter
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.438

8.  Cancer families: what risks are they given and do the risks affect management?

Authors:  E M Rosser; J A Hurst; C J Chapman
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 6.318

9.  The prevalence of a family history of cancer in general practice.

Authors:  N Johnson; T Lancaster; A Fuller; S V Hodgson
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.267

10.  A descriptive study of UK cancer genetics services: an emerging clinical response to the new genetics.

Authors:  D Wonderling; P Hopwood; A Cull; F Douglas; M Watson; J Burn; K McPherson
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2001-07-20       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Applying theory to characterize impediments to dissemination of community-facing family health history tools: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Caitlin G Allen; Debra Duquette; Yue Guan; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2019-07-02

Review 2.  What characterizes cancer family history collection tools? A critical literature review.

Authors:  J E Cleophat; H Nabi; S Pelletier; K Bouchard; M Dorval
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Literacy assessment of family health history tools for public health prevention.

Authors:  C Wang; R E Gallo; L Fleisher; S M Miller
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 4.  Quality indicators for the referral process from primary to specialised mental health care: an explorative study in accordance with the RAND appropriateness method.

Authors:  Miriam Hartveit; Kris Vanhaecht; Olav Thorsen; Eva Biringer; Kjell Haug; Aslak Aslaksen
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 5.  Family history tools for primary care: A systematic review.

Authors:  Špela Miroševič; Zalika Klemenc-Ketiš; Borut Peterlin
Journal:  Eur J Gen Pract       Date:  2022-12       Impact factor: 3.636

6.  Leveraging Health Information Technology to Collect Family Cancer History: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Xuan Li; Ryan M Kahn; Noelani Wing; Zhen Ni Zhou; Andreas Ian Lackner; Hannah Krinsky; Nora Badiner; Rhea Fogla; Isabel Wolfe; Hannah Bergeron; Becky Baltich Nelson; Charlene Thomas; Paul J Christos; Ravi N Sharaf; Evelyn Cantillo; Kevin Holcomb; Eloise Chapman-Davis; Melissa K Frey
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2021-06
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.