| Title |
Systematic review of the empirical investigation of resources to support decision-making regarding BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing in women with breast cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Patient Education & Counseling, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.pec.2017.11.016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chloe Grimmett, Karen Pickett, Jonathan Shepherd, Karen Welch, Alejandra Recio-Saucedo, Elke Streit, Helen Seers, Anne Armstrong, Ramsey I. Cutress, D. Gareth Evans, Ellen Copson, Bettina Meiser, Diana Eccles, Claire Foster |
| Abstract |
Identify existing resources developed and/or evaluated empirically in the published literature designed to support women with breast cancer making decisions regarding genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations. Systematic review of seven electronic databases. Studies were included if they described or evaluated resources that were designed to support women with breast cancer in making a decision to have genetic counselling or testing for familial breast cancer. Outcome and process evaluations, using any type of study design, as well as articles reporting the development of decision aids, were eligible for inclusion. Total of 9 publications, describing 6 resources were identified. Resources were effective at increasing knowledge or understanding of hereditary breast cancer. Satisfaction with resources was high. There was no evidence that any resource increased distress, worry or decisional conflict. Few resources included active functionalities for example, values-based exercises, to support decision-making. Tailored resources supporting decision-making may be helpful and valued by patients and increase knowledge of hereditary breast cancer, without causing additional distress. Clinicians should provide supportive written information to patients where it is available. However, there is a need for robustly developed decision tools to support decision-making around genetic testing in women with breast cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 5 | 38% |
| Australia | 1 | 8% |
| India | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 69% |
| Scientists | 3 | 23% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 9% |
| Psychology | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 02 May 2018.
All research outputs
#4,636,565
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from Patient Education & Counseling
#894
of 4,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,246
of 447,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient Education & Counseling
#21
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
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 447,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 70% of its contemporaries.