↓ Skip to main content

Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations

Overview of attention for article published in Genetics in Medicine, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Which BRCA genetic testing programs are ready for implementation in health care? A systematic review of economic evaluations
Published in
Genetics in Medicine, April 2016
DOI 10.1038/gim.2016.29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elvira D’Andrea, Carolina Marzuillo, Corrado De Vito, Marco Di Marco, Erica Pitini, Maria Rosaria Vacchio, Paolo Villari

Abstract

There is considerable evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of BRCA genetic testing programs, but whether they represent good use of financial resources is not clear. Therefore, we aimed to identify the main health-care programs for BRCA testing and to evaluate their cost-effectiveness. We performed a systematic review of full economic evaluations of health-care programs involving BRCA testing. Nine economic evaluations were included, and four main categories of BRCA testing programs were identified: (i) population-based genetic screening of individuals without cancer, either comprehensive or targeted based on ancestry; (ii) family history (FH)-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals without cancer but with FH suggestive of BRCA mutation; (iii) familial mutation (FM)-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals without cancer but with known familial BRCA mutation; and (iv) cancer-based genetic screening, i.e., testing individuals with BRCA-related cancers. Currently BRCA1/2 population-based screening represents good value for the money among Ashkenazi Jews only. FH-based screening is potentially very cost-effective, although further studies that include costs of identifying high-risk women are needed. There is no evidence of cost-effectiveness for BRCA screening of all newly diagnosed cases of breast/ovarian cancers followed by cascade testing of relatives, but programs that include tools for identifying affected women at higher risk for inherited forms are promising. Cost-effectiveness is highly sensitive to the cost of BRCA1/2 testing.Genet Med 18 12, 1171-1180.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 108 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 18%
Other 11 10%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 8%
Other 28 26%
Unknown 20 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 25 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,293,529
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Genetics in Medicine
#1,314
of 2,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,710
of 315,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetics in Medicine
#19
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,943 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 315,337 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 53 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 64% of its contemporaries.