A gift or a yoke? Women’s and men’s responses to genetic risk information from BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This qualitative study explored the impact of genetic risk information from BRCA1/2 testing on individuals' subjective understandings of self and self-identity. In-depth interviews were conducted with 39 participants (34 women and 5 men) who had received test results from BRCA1/2 testing. Themes emerging from qualitative data analysis revealed that participants linked their positive results to becoming more aware of their physical selves (embodied self), their selves in relation to family (familial-relational self) and their selves in relation to wider kinship or social groups (social self). Genetic information was generally viewed as enabling; it allowed participants to take measures (surveillance or prophylactic surgery) to confront the disease. However, for a small minority of women, knowledge about their genetic risk had a profound and limiting effect on their agency. Rather than giving them a sense of control, they saw little opportunity to fight the disease. For a few people, identification of a genetic mutation thrust them into an uncertain state, that is in a position of being neither ill nor completely well. In one case, BRCA information led to a disruption of social identity. Further work is needed to assess the impact of age and life stage on psychological responses to genetic information on cancer susceptibility.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".