Patient satisfaction and cancer‐related distress among unselected Jewish women undergoing genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is not known to what extent participation in a genetic testing program for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which does not include an extensive pre-test counselling session, influences cancer-related distress, cancer risk perception and patient satisfaction. Unselected Jewish women in Ontario were offered genetic testing for three common Jewish BRCA mutations. Before testing and 1-year post-testing, the women completed questionnaires which assessed cancer-related distress, cancer risk perception, and satisfaction. A total of 2080 women enrolled in the study; of these, 1516 (73%) completed a 1-year follow-up questionnaire. In women with a BRCA mutation, the mean breast cancer risk perception increased from 41.1% to 59.6% after receiving a positive genetic test result (p = 0.002). Among non-carriers, breast cancer risk perception decreased slightly, from 35.8% to 33.5% (p = 0.08). The mean level of cancer-related distress increased significantly for women with a BRCA mutation, but did not change in women without a mutation; 92.8% expressed satisfaction with the testing process. The results of this study suggest that the majority of Jewish women who took part in population genetic screening for BRCA1 and BRCA2 were satisfied with the delivery of genetic testing and would recommend testing to other Jewish women. However, women with a BRCA mutation experienced increased levels of cancer-related distress.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it