Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Public Health Genomics ; 27(1): 100-109, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39173603

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: When a pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation is identified in a family, cascade genetic testing of family members is recommended since the results may inform screening or treatment decisions in men and women. However, rates of cascade testing are low, and men are considerably less likely than women to pursue cascade testing. To facilitate cascade testing in men, we designed a Web-based genetic education tool that addressed barriers to cascade testing, was individually tailored, delivered proactively, and could be used in lieu of pretest genetic counseling to streamline the cascade testing process. METHODS: We randomized 63 untested men from hereditary cancer families to Web-based genetic education (WGE) versus enhanced usual care (EUC). WGE participants were provided access to a genetic education website after which they could accept or decline genetic testing or opt for pretest genetic counseling. EUC participants received an informational brochure and a letter informing them of their eligibility for genetic testing and recommending they schedule genetic counseling. The primary outcome was the uptake of genetic testing. RESULTS: Men in the WGE group were more likely to complete genetic counseling and/or genetic testing (43% vs. 12.1%; χ2 [n = 63, df = 1] = 7.77, p = 0.005). WGE participants were also more likely to complete genetic testing compared to men in the EUC group (30% vs. 9.1%; χ2 [n = 63, df = 1] = 4.46, p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: This preliminary trial suggests that a streamlined approach to genetic testing using proactively delivered genetic education may reduce barriers to cascade testing for at-risk men, leading to increased uptake. These results should be interpreted cautiously given the select sample and high rate of non-response.


Asunto(s)
Proteína BRCA2 , Asesoramiento Genético , Pruebas Genéticas , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas Genéticas/métodos , Femenino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Asesoramiento Genético/métodos , Adulto , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Proteína BRCA1/genética , Neoplasias Ováricas/genética , Neoplasias Ováricas/diagnóstico , Mutación , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/métodos , Anciano , Síndrome de Cáncer de Mama y Ovario Hereditario/genética , Síndrome de Cáncer de Mama y Ovario Hereditario/diagnóstico
2.
J Cancer Educ ; 2024 May 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38730103

RESUMEN

Recent treatment advances have resulted in significantly increased survival times following metastatic breast cancer (MBC) diagnosis. Novel treatment approaches-and their related side effects-have changed the landscape of MBC treatment decision-making. We developed a prototype of an online educational tool to prepare patients with MBC for shared decision-making with their oncologists. We describe the five phases of tool development: (1) in-depth, semi-structured qualitative interviews and (2) feedback on storyboards of initial content with patients with MBC and oncology providers. This was followed by three phases of iterative feedback with patients in which they responded to (3) initial, non-navigable website content and (4) a beta version of the full website. In the final phase (5), patients newly diagnosed with MBC (N = 6) used the website prototype for 1 week and completed surveys assessing acceptability, feasibility, treatment knowledge, preparation for decision-making, and self-efficacy for decision-making. Participants in Phase 1 characterized a cyclical process of MBC treatment decision-making and identified key information needs. Website content and structure was iteratively developed in Phases 2-4. Most participants in Phase 5 (n = 4) accessed the website 2-5 times. All participants who accessed the website at least once (n = 5) felt they learned new information from the website prototype and would recommend it to others newly-diagnosed with MBC. After using the website prototype, participants reported high preparation and self-efficacy for decision-making. This multiphase, iterative process resulted in a prototype intervention designed to support decision-making for MBC patients.

5.
J Womens Health (Larchmt) ; 33(5): 639-649, 2024 May.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38484303

RESUMEN

Introduction: Women with ≥20% lifetime breast cancer risk can receive supplemental breast cancer screening with MRI. We examined factors associated with recommendation for screening breast MRI among primary care providers (PCPs), gynecologists (GYNs), and radiologists. Methods: We conducted a sequential mixed-methods study. Quantitative: Participants (N = 72) reported recommendations for mammogram and breast MRI via clinical vignettes describing hypothetical patients with moderate, high, and very high breast cancer risk. Logistic regressions assessed the relationships of clinician-level factors (gender, specialty, years practicing) and practice-level factors (practice type, imaging facilities available) with screening recommendations. Qualitative: We interviewed a subset of survey participants (n = 17, 17/72 = 24%) regarding their decision-making about breast cancer screening recommendations. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed with directed content analysis. Results: Compared with PCPs, GYNs and radiologists were significantly more likely to recommend breast MRI for high-risk (ORs = 4.09 and 4.09, respectively) and very-high-risk patients (ORs = 8.56 and 18.33, respectively). Qualitative analysis identified two key phases along the clinical pathway for high-risk women. Phase 1 was "identifying high-risk women," which included three subthemes (systems for risk assessment, barriers to risk assessment, scope of practice issues). Phase 2 was "referral for screening," which included three subthemes (conflicting guidelines, scope of practice issues, legal implications). Frequency of themes differed between specialties, potentially explaining findings from the quantitative phase. Conclusions: There are significant differences between specialties in supplemental breast cancer screening recommendations. Multilevel interventions are needed to support identification and management of women with high breast cancer risk, particularly for PCPs.


Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Mamografía , Derivación y Consulta , Humanos , Femenino , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/estadística & datos numéricos , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Toma de Decisiones , Atención Primaria de Salud , Médicos de Atención Primaria , Radiólogos/estadística & datos numéricos , Investigación Cualitativa
6.
Res Sq ; 2024 Jan 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38352437

RESUMEN

Abstract Objective: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends biennial screening mammography through age 74. Guidelines vary as to whether or not they recommended mammography screening to women aged 75 and older. This study aims to determine the ability of ChatGPT to provide appropriate recommendations for breast cancer screening in patients aged 75 years and older. Methods: 12 questions and 4 clinical vignettes addressing fundamental concepts about breast cancer screening and prevention in patients aged 75 years and older were created and asked to ChatGPT three consecutive times to generate 3 sets of responses. The responses were graded by a multi-disciplinary panel of experts in the intersection of breast cancer screening and aging . The responses were graded as 'appropriate', 'inappropriate', or 'unreliable' based on the reviewer's clinical judgment, content of the response, and whether the content was consistent across the three responses . Appropriateness was determined through a majority consensus. Results: The responses generated by ChatGPT were appropriate for 11/17 questions (64%). Three questions were graded as inappropriate (18%) and 2 questions were graded as unreliable (12%). A consensus was not reached on one question (6%) and was graded as no consensus. Conclusions: While recognizing the limitations of ChatGPT, it has potential to provide accurate health care information and could be utilized by healthcare professionals to assist in providing recommendations for breast cancer screening in patients age 75 years and older. Physician oversight will be necessary, due to the possibility of ChatGPT to provide inappropriate and unreliable responses, and the importance of accuracy in medicine.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA