Recall of numerical risk estimates and counsellees' perceptions of the importance of risk information following genetic counselling for breast and ovarian cancer

Hallowell, Nina; Green, J M; Statham, Helen; Murton, F; Mpm., Richards

doi:10.1080/13548509708400572

Cited by 30 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We identified 43 papers [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56] that investigated cognitive, affective, and/or behavioral outcomes of genetic counseling, 18 of which were excluded [39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56]. The lack of prospective data was the most common reason for exclusion [39-41, 44, 49, 51, 52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Impact of Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychological Impact of Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, in an earlier study of women attending a clinic with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, one of the dissatisfactions reported by several women was the lack of support or help in informing relatives who might be at risk. 61,62 Families offered followup genetic counselling services, including those provided through genetic family registers, report better preparation for discussing genetic issues with their relatives. 23 We should be working on ways of helping families to communicate effectively and sensitively across the generations and should include support for this in the training of genetics professionals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetic professionals' reports of nondisclosure of genetic risk information within families

Richards²,

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patients attending genetic clinics are often the main gatekeepers of information for other family members. There has been much debate about the circumstances under which professionals may have an obligation, or may be permitted, to pass on personal genetic information about their clients but without their consent to other family members. We report findings from the first prospective study investigating the frequency with which genetics professionals become concerned about the failure of clients to pass on such information to their relatives. In all, 12 UK and two Australian regional genetic services reported such cases over 12 months, including details of actions taken by professionals in response to the clients' failure to disclose information. A total of 65 cases of nondisclosure were reported, representing o1% of the genetic clinic consultations in the collaborating centres during the study period. These included 39 cases of the failure of parents not passing full information to their adult offspring, 22 cases where siblings or other relatives were not given information and four cases where information was withheld from partnersincluding former and prospective partners. Professionals reported clients' reasons for withholding information as complex, more often citing concern and the desire to shield relatives from distress rather than poor family relationships. In most cases, the professionals took further steps to persuade their clients to make a disclosure but in no instance did the professional force a disclosure without the client's consent.

show abstract

“…(Hallowell et al 1997;Hallowell et al 1998). In fact, the subjective numeric probability for illness an individual perceived prior to counseling predicts numeric probability perceived after counseling -a phenomenon clearly reviewed and described elsewhere (Senay and Kaphingst 2009).…”

Section: Numeric Probability and Risk Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re‐conceptualizing Risk in Genetic Counseling: Implications for Clinical Practice

Austin

2010

Journal of Genetic Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk communication is an important component of genetic counseling. However, many authors have noted that after genetic counseling, subjective risk frequently does not match the objective risk provided by the counselor. This inevitably leads to the conclusion that the risk communication process was not "effective". There has been much discussion about how this problem can be better addressed, such that our clients recall numeric risks more accurately after genetic counseling. This article draws on the risk and probability literature from other fields (including psychology, economics, philosophy and climate change) to deconstruct the concept of "risk" and to attempt to expand upon and develop thought and discussion about and investigation of the risk communication process in genetic counseling.

show abstract

Recall of numerical risk estimates and counsellees' perceptions of the importance of risk information following genetic counselling for breast and ovarian cancer

Cited by 30 publications

References 16 publications

Psychological Impact of Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Psychological Impact of Genetic Counseling for Familial Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Genetic professionals' reports of nondisclosure of genetic risk information within families

Re‐conceptualizing Risk in Genetic Counseling: Implications for Clinical Practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About