Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer
Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in BRCA1/ 2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Familial cancer 2016-10, Vol.15 (4), p.529-539 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 539 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 529 |
| container_title | Familial cancer |
| container_volume | 15 |
| creator | Jacobs, Aryana S. Schwartz, Marc D. Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis Nusbaum, Rachel H. Hooker, Gillian W. DeMarco, Tiffani A. Heinzmann, Jessica E. McKinnon, Wendy McCormick, Shelley R. Davis, Claire Forman, Andrea D. Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez Dalton, Emily Tully, Diana Moglia Graves, Kristi D. Similuk, Morgan Kelly, Scott Peshkin, Beth N. |
| description | Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in
BRCA1/
2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11,
p
= 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5011450</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1817065067</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-18034acec9dc45763a5ad78b25eb50067d73b7230b1fcc4c19a624418aeab9f63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk2LFDEQhoMo7jr6A7xIwMte2q0knaRzEWTxCxb0oOeQTlfPZOlJxqR72D351zfDrMu6IHiqkHrqzVupIuQ1g3cMQJ8XBqozDTDVGAPQXD8hp0xq0Whu-NN6FjVrFMAJeVHKFQAHLvRzcsKVUUZAd0p-f3dzwDhTFwe6xohz8NSnJRacUqY7zB53c0ix0DTSEJt6U1Kk-xqWQmeccLdJER_XhrimYxXYYMYhzC7f0D6jK_N52rscXKTeRY_5JXk2uqngq7u4Ij8_ffxx8aW5_Pb568WHy8ZLEHPDOhCt8-jN4FuplXDSDbrrucReAig9aNFrLqBno_etZ8Yp3rasc-h6MyqxIu-Purul3-Lga8vZTXaXw7Z6s8kF-3cmho1dp72VwFhbPazI2Z1ATr8WLLPdhuJxmlzEtBTLOq4NExLkf6BMg5LVdUXfPkKv0pJj_YkDpVpm6sQqxY6Uz6mUjOO9bwb2sAn2uAm2boI9bIK9rjVvHjZ8X_Fn9BXgR6DUVFxjfvD0P1VvATu_wng</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1816419023</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Jacobs, Aryana S. ; Schwartz, Marc D. ; Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis ; Nusbaum, Rachel H. ; Hooker, Gillian W. ; DeMarco, Tiffani A. ; Heinzmann, Jessica E. ; McKinnon, Wendy ; McCormick, Shelley R. ; Davis, Claire ; Forman, Andrea D. ; Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez ; Dalton, Emily ; Tully, Diana Moglia ; Graves, Kristi D. ; Similuk, Morgan ; Kelly, Scott ; Peshkin, Beth N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Jacobs, Aryana S. ; Schwartz, Marc D. ; Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis ; Nusbaum, Rachel H. ; Hooker, Gillian W. ; DeMarco, Tiffani A. ; Heinzmann, Jessica E. ; McKinnon, Wendy ; McCormick, Shelley R. ; Davis, Claire ; Forman, Andrea D. ; Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez ; Dalton, Emily ; Tully, Diana Moglia ; Graves, Kristi D. ; Similuk, Morgan ; Kelly, Scott ; Peshkin, Beth N.</creatorcontrib><description>Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in
BRCA1/
2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11,
p
= 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172,
p
< 0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21,
p
= 0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1389-9600</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7292</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 26969308</identifier><identifier>CODEN: FCAAAJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences ; Biomedicine ; Breast Neoplasms - genetics ; Breast Neoplasms - psychology ; Cancer Research ; Counselors - psychology ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Genes, BRCA1 ; Genes, BRCA2 ; Genetic Counseling - methods ; Genetic Counseling - psychology ; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice ; Human Genetics ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; Original Article ; Ovarian cancer ; Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics ; Ovarian Neoplasms - psychology ; Patient Satisfaction ; Socioeconomic Factors ; Telephone</subject><ispartof>Familial cancer, 2016-10, Vol.15 (4), p.529-539</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-18034acec9dc45763a5ad78b25eb50067d73b7230b1fcc4c19a624418aeab9f63</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-18034acec9dc45763a5ad78b25eb50067d73b7230b1fcc4c19a624418aeab9f63</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26969308$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Jacobs, Aryana S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Marc D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nusbaum, Rachel H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hooker, Gillian W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeMarco, Tiffani A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinzmann, Jessica E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinnon, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCormick, Shelley R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forman, Andrea D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dalton, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tully, Diana Moglia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graves, Kristi D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Similuk, Morgan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peshkin, Beth N.</creatorcontrib><title>Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer</title><title>Familial cancer</title><addtitle>Familial Cancer</addtitle><addtitle>Fam Cancer</addtitle><description>Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in
BRCA1/
2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11,
p
= 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172,
p
< 0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21,
p
= 0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.</description><subject>Biomedical and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Biomedicine</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</subject><subject>Cancer Research</subject><subject>Counselors - psychology</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genes, BRCA1</subject><subject>Genes, BRCA2</subject><subject>Genetic Counseling - methods</subject><subject>Genetic Counseling - psychology</subject><subject>Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice</subject><subject>Human Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Ovarian cancer</subject><subject>Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Ovarian Neoplasms - psychology</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Socioeconomic Factors</subject><subject>Telephone</subject><issn>1389-9600</issn><issn>1573-7292</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkk2LFDEQhoMo7jr6A7xIwMte2q0knaRzEWTxCxb0oOeQTlfPZOlJxqR72D351zfDrMu6IHiqkHrqzVupIuQ1g3cMQJ8XBqozDTDVGAPQXD8hp0xq0Whu-NN6FjVrFMAJeVHKFQAHLvRzcsKVUUZAd0p-f3dzwDhTFwe6xohz8NSnJRacUqY7zB53c0ix0DTSEJt6U1Kk-xqWQmeccLdJER_XhrimYxXYYMYhzC7f0D6jK_N52rscXKTeRY_5JXk2uqngq7u4Ij8_ffxx8aW5_Pb568WHy8ZLEHPDOhCt8-jN4FuplXDSDbrrucReAig9aNFrLqBno_etZ8Yp3rasc-h6MyqxIu-Purul3-Lga8vZTXaXw7Z6s8kF-3cmho1dp72VwFhbPazI2Z1ATr8WLLPdhuJxmlzEtBTLOq4NExLkf6BMg5LVdUXfPkKv0pJj_YkDpVpm6sQqxY6Uz6mUjOO9bwb2sAn2uAm2boI9bIK9rjVvHjZ8X_Fn9BXgR6DUVFxjfvD0P1VvATu_wng</recordid><startdate>20161001</startdate><enddate>20161001</enddate><creator>Jacobs, Aryana S.</creator><creator>Schwartz, Marc D.</creator><creator>Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis</creator><creator>Nusbaum, Rachel H.</creator><creator>Hooker, Gillian W.</creator><creator>DeMarco, Tiffani A.</creator><creator>Heinzmann, Jessica E.</creator><creator>McKinnon, Wendy</creator><creator>McCormick, Shelley R.</creator><creator>Davis, Claire</creator><creator>Forman, Andrea D.</creator><creator>Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez</creator><creator>Dalton, Emily</creator><creator>Tully, Diana Moglia</creator><creator>Graves, Kristi D.</creator><creator>Similuk, Morgan</creator><creator>Kelly, Scott</creator><creator>Peshkin, Beth N.</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161001</creationdate><title>Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer</title><author>Jacobs, Aryana S. ; Schwartz, Marc D. ; Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis ; Nusbaum, Rachel H. ; Hooker, Gillian W. ; DeMarco, Tiffani A. ; Heinzmann, Jessica E. ; McKinnon, Wendy ; McCormick, Shelley R. ; Davis, Claire ; Forman, Andrea D. ; Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez ; Dalton, Emily ; Tully, Diana Moglia ; Graves, Kristi D. ; Similuk, Morgan ; Kelly, Scott ; Peshkin, Beth N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-18034acec9dc45763a5ad78b25eb50067d73b7230b1fcc4c19a624418aeab9f63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Biomedical and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Biomedicine</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</topic><topic>Cancer Research</topic><topic>Counselors - psychology</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genes, BRCA1</topic><topic>Genes, BRCA2</topic><topic>Genetic Counseling - methods</topic><topic>Genetic Counseling - psychology</topic><topic>Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice</topic><topic>Human Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Ovarian cancer</topic><topic>Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Ovarian Neoplasms - psychology</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Socioeconomic Factors</topic><topic>Telephone</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Jacobs, Aryana S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Marc D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nusbaum, Rachel H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hooker, Gillian W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeMarco, Tiffani A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Heinzmann, Jessica E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McKinnon, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCormick, Shelley R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davis, Claire</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forman, Andrea D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dalton, Emily</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tully, Diana Moglia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Graves, Kristi D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Similuk, Morgan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Scott</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peshkin, Beth N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Familial cancer</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Jacobs, Aryana S.</au><au>Schwartz, Marc D.</au><au>Valdimarsdottir, Heiddis</au><au>Nusbaum, Rachel H.</au><au>Hooker, Gillian W.</au><au>DeMarco, Tiffani A.</au><au>Heinzmann, Jessica E.</au><au>McKinnon, Wendy</au><au>McCormick, Shelley R.</au><au>Davis, Claire</au><au>Forman, Andrea D.</au><au>Lebensohn, Alexandra Perez</au><au>Dalton, Emily</au><au>Tully, Diana Moglia</au><au>Graves, Kristi D.</au><au>Similuk, Morgan</au><au>Kelly, Scott</au><au>Peshkin, Beth N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer</atitle><jtitle>Familial cancer</jtitle><stitle>Familial Cancer</stitle><addtitle>Fam Cancer</addtitle><date>2016-10-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>529</spage><epage>539</epage><pages>529-539</pages><issn>1389-9600</issn><eissn>1573-7292</eissn><coden>FCAAAJ</coden><abstract>Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in
BRCA1/
2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11,
p
= 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172,
p
< 0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21,
p
= 0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><pmid>26969308</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x</doi><tpages>11</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1389-9600 |
| ispartof | Familial cancer, 2016-10, Vol.15 (4), p.529-539 |
| issn | 1389-9600 1573-7292 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5011450 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Biomedical and Life Sciences Biomedicine Breast Neoplasms - genetics Breast Neoplasms - psychology Cancer Research Counselors - psychology Epidemiology Female Genes, BRCA1 Genes, BRCA2 Genetic Counseling - methods Genetic Counseling - psychology Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice Human Genetics Humans Middle Aged Original Article Ovarian cancer Ovarian Neoplasms - genetics Ovarian Neoplasms - psychology Patient Satisfaction Socioeconomic Factors Telephone |
| title | Patient and genetic counselor perceptions of in-person versus telephone genetic counseling for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T17%3A21%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patient%20and%20genetic%20counselor%20perceptions%20of%20in-person%20versus%20telephone%20genetic%20counseling%20for%20hereditary%20breast/ovarian%20cancer&rft.jtitle=Familial%20cancer&rft.au=Jacobs,%20Aryana%20S.&rft.date=2016-10-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=529&rft.epage=539&rft.pages=529-539&rft.issn=1389-9600&rft.eissn=1573-7292&rft.coden=FCAAAJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10689-016-9900-x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1817065067%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1816419023&rft_id=info:pmid/26969308&rfr_iscdi=true |