Discourse / Discours - Pilot Testing of a Psycho-educational Telephone Intervention for Women Receiving Uninformative BRCA1/2 Genetic Test Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence suggests that women who receive uninformative results for breast and ovarian cancer (BRCA1/2) gene mutations may experience as much distress as women whose results indicate the presence of a gene mutation. No intervention to reduce distress after receipt of uninformative results has yet been tested. The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility and preliminary effects of a psycho-educational telephone (PET) intervention to reduce distress in women who receive uninformative BRCA1/2 results. A single group with repeated measures was used to assess the impact of the intervention on 72 such women. After receiving the results, most of the women continued to feel uncertain about their carrier genetic status. However, their distress significantly decreased between receipt of uninformative results and 3 months post-intervention (p = 0.01). The preliminary findings suggest that a PET uncertainty intervention is clinically feasible and may reduce the distress of receiving uninformative results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".