MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

NuGenA (Nurse Led Genetic Counselling and Awareness): A proof-of-concept to implementation of genetic counseling for HBOC in LMICs.

2025· article· en· W4410819570 on OpenAlexaff
Asima Mukhopadhyay, Dona Chakraborty, Papiya Mukherjee, Roma Gupta, Ranajit Mandal, Nisha Singh, Priyanka Singh, Jitendra Pariyar, Fawzia Hossain, Rokeya Anwar, Bindiya Gupta, Afrin Fatima Shaffi, Aisha Mustapha, Runsi Ayona Sen, Priya Bhosale, Frances Reid, Clara Mackay, Mary Eiken

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsOvarian Cancer Canada
FundersConquer Cancer Foundation
KeywordsMedicineGenetic counselingNursingFamily medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10583 Background: Poor access to genetic testing and counselling represents a major gap in cancer care in resource-restricted-settings. Our pilot work in Eastern India (2017-2019) demonstrated improved uptake of BRCA genetic testing (89% vs.55%) in ovarian cancer (OC) after training one nurse specialist in genetic counselling. We introduced NuGenA program in 2020 to scale-up this effort as proof-of-concept. Methods: Ethical approvals were obtained (KolGo/CTRI/2021/06/034308/HMSC). A nurse-led structured training program combining lectures/modules/live-demonstration-workshops/role-playing using offline and virtual learning methods were administered to sensitize/train all tiers of nurses including train-the-trainers in genetic counselling. A comprehensive NuGenA questionnaire including demographic, family history, CAM, pre/post-test counselling satisfaction-regret scale, QOL and willingness-to-pay (WTP) for genetic testing was administered by trained nurses. Physician and nursing interviews were conducted at 1 year to assess barriers/challenges/success of program. KolGoTrg EASE (Ethical/Acceptable/Affordable/Sustainable/Scalable/Effective/Early-diagnosis-and-treatment of barriers) matrix was used to measure key performance indicators and impact of implementation. Results: Through 40 sessions/workshops, 126 nurses were trained across India (8 centres, 34 nurses), Nepal (10 centres,30 nurses), Bangladesh (2 centres,60 nurses) and Africa (2 centres,2 nurses) with significant improvement in post training KAP scores. 7 genetic clinic/set-ups were created. 270 OC patients and 458 family members were counselled by nurses. 159 OC patients had BRCA testing, 48 (30%) being positive. Until now, out of 235 at-risk family members identified, 90 were counselled and 12 tested for BRCA (6 positive);2 opted for risk-reducing surgery. Unique barriers/challenges were identified including cost of BRCA test, provider hesitancy, social stigma, requiring customised solutions. WTP for genetic testing using CoPay model was accepted by 99/158 (62%). Another 100 community-nurses were sensitized through NuGenA camps/sessions approved by government/health authorities resulting in conduct of >150 COBRA (cervix/oral/ovary/breast-cancer awareness) sessions and patient-public-engagement initiatives. NuGenA modules are being included in national/international nursing curriculums. A World Ovarian Cancer Coalition charter-champion award and adoption by IGCS training sites exemplify global recognition/outreach. Conclusions: Nurse-led model proved scalable and impactful in resource-restricted settings, facilitating transformative changes in provider/patient-public engagement, attitude and practice towards genetic testing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.421 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBRCA gene mutations in cancer→French-language works237,207→