2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2017.03.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

“When information is not enough”: A model for understanding BRCA -positive previvors’ information needs regarding hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

3
36
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
3
36
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Despite these caveats, the current sample provides novel insight into the experiences and needs of unique subgroups of young adults (e.g., non‐attenders of genetic clinics, emerging adult males). The findings indicate potential information differences depending on genetic clinic attendance and are consistent with the stratification of resources and information support (Dean et al, ). Possible advancements in technological platforms to reach pre‐consultation at‐risk young adults are likely, yet further research is needed with a larger sample to expound upon these findings.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
“…Despite these caveats, the current sample provides novel insight into the experiences and needs of unique subgroups of young adults (e.g., non‐attenders of genetic clinics, emerging adult males). The findings indicate potential information differences depending on genetic clinic attendance and are consistent with the stratification of resources and information support (Dean et al, ). Possible advancements in technological platforms to reach pre‐consultation at‐risk young adults are likely, yet further research is needed with a larger sample to expound upon these findings.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 82%
“…However, some women in our study who were managing the process of genetic testing at the same time as their cancer diagnosis and treatment found the process overwhelming, as has been reported elsewhere [27]. Dean et al [28] suggest that women who are BRCA-positive but have not had a cancer diagnosis have different information needs than those who are currently or have previously been diagnosed and treated for cancer. This may be an important area for future research.…”
Section: Limitations and Implications For Future Researchsupporting
confidence: 62%
“…Skop et al (2018) found that men with breast cancer risks often differentiate themselves from women by, for example, referring to their screening and breast cancer risk using the word Bchest^rather than Bbreast.^Similarly, we found that the men in our study wanted to differentiate their risks from the risks of women and do so by acquiring more personalized and targeted information. Dean et al (2017) note that women often desire information through personal stories and/or emotional support, while the men in our study discussed a preference for statistics and lists. The differences between our results and studies discussing women's information needs show that information available for men is significantly lagging behind what is available for women, and the information that is provided is not being provided in a way men prefer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…While some research has examined cancer patients and cancer survivors' information needs (Carey et al 2012;Kent et al 2012) as well as the information needs of female BRCApositive patients who have not been diagnosed with cancer (Dean 2016), men with BRCA-related cancer risks have distinct needs in regard to their information handling and use. For example, while Dean et al (2017) found women go through four phases in their information needs, our male participants did not discuss their information needs across a timeline, but rather focused on the overall dearth of information available for men. In fact, although women have discussed uncertainty regarding their future, cancer scares, and motherhood, the men in this study almost exclusively discussed only the uncertainty that a lack of clear information provoked (Dean 2016).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%