MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Feasibility and acceptability of providing nurse counsellor genetics clinics in primary care

2006· article· en· W2060692875 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Greta Westwood, Ruth Pickering, Sue Latter, Anneke Lucassen, Paul Little, I. Karen Temple

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily medicineGenetic counselingMedicineNursingMedical geneticsAccreditationGenetic testingMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: This paper reports a pilot study to test the feasibility of providing genetic nurse counsellor clinics in primary care in the United Kingdom, to develop a questionnaire to evaluate patients' satisfaction with their genetics appointments, and to establish patient and provider costs. BACKGROUND: Genetic counsellors are healthcare professionals with experience in medical genetics and counselling and often have a professional background in nursing, science, genetics, psychology, or public health and work as members of multidisciplinary teams. Professional genetic counsellor accreditation is possible in the United Kingdom, United States of America, Australia and Canada. Increasing referrals to specialist genetics services have precipitated a review of models of service delivery in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A random half of 74 general practices in three primary care trusts were selected for the study, and the patients registered with these practices and referred to the clinical genetics service, were offered an appointment in primary care with a genetic nurse counsellor. A clinic follow-up postal questionnaire was developed. RESULTS: Between July 2002 and May 2003, 64 appointments were offered to patients referred and registered with the selected general practices, 45 (79%) patients attended their appointment and 34 (77%) returned their follow-up questionnaire. Total mean satisfaction score was high and patients were most satisfied with the information and affective domains of the appointment. Those referred with a family history of cancer were more satisfied than those referred with a non-cancer diagnosis. Forty-eight per cent of patients seen by the genetic nurse counsellor did not need to attend a further appointment with a doctor in secondary care. Patients were satisfied with the travel time and distance to clinic and patient clinic costs were low. CONCLUSION: Patients do attend genetic nurse counsellor clinics in primary care, and are satisfied with the new location. A large cluster randomized controlled trial is now being conducted to obtain a controlled comparison of clinic attendance rates and patients' satisfaction with clinics in primary vs. secondary care settings.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced NursingSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207