↓ Skip to main content

Breast Cancer Risk Perceptions among Relatives of Women with Uninformative Negative BRCA1/2 Test Results: The Moderating Effect of the Amount of Shared Information

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Genetic Counseling, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
Breast Cancer Risk Perceptions among Relatives of Women with Uninformative Negative BRCA1/2 Test Results: The Moderating Effect of the Amount of Shared Information
Published in
Journal of Genetic Counseling, August 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10897-015-9866-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah O. Himes, Margaret F. Clayton, Gary W. Donaldson, Lee Ellington, Saundra S. Buys, Anita Y. Kinney

Abstract

The most common result of BRCA1/2 mutation testing when performed in a family without a previously identified mutation is an uninformative negative test result. Women in these families may have an increased risk for breast cancer because of mutations in non-BRCA breast cancer predisposition genes, including moderate- or low-risk genes, or shared environmental factors. Genetic counselors often encourage counselees to share information with family members, however it is unclear how much information counselees share and the impact that shared information may have on accuracy of risk perception in family members. We evaluated 85 sisters and daughters of women who received uninformative negative BRCA1/2 results. We measured accuracy of risk perception using a latent variable model where accuracy was represented as the correlation between perceived risk (indicators = verbal and quantitative measures) and calculated risk (indicators = Claus and BRCAPRO). Participants who reported more information was shared with them by their sister or mother about her genetic counseling session had greater accuracy of risk perception (0.707, p = 0.000) than those who reported little information was shared (0.326, p = 0.003). However, counselees shared very little information; nearly 20 % of family members reported their sister or mother shared nothing with them about her genetic counseling. Family members were generally not aware of the existence of a genetic counseling summary letter. Our findings underscore the need for effective strategies that facilitate counselees to share information about their genetic counseling sessions. Such communication may help their relatives better understand their cancer risks and enhance risk appropriate cancer prevention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 19%
Psychology 12 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,094,300
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#574
of 1,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,888
of 264,084 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Genetic Counseling
#8
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,142 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,084 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.