↓ Skip to main content

Genetic testing and personalized ovarian cancer screening: a survey of public attitudes

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genetic testing and personalized ovarian cancer screening: a survey of public attitudes
Published in
BMC Women's Health, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12905-016-0325-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susanne F. Meisel, Belinda Rahman, Lucy Side, Lindsay Fraser, Sue Gessler, Anne Lanceley, Jane Wardle, for the PROMISE-2016 study team

Abstract

Advances in genetic technologies are expected to make population-wide genetic testing feasible. This could provide a basis for risk stratified cancer screening; but acceptability in the target populations has not been explored. We assessed attitudes to risk-stratified ovarian cancer (OC) screening based on prior genetic risk assessment using a survey design. Home-based interviews were carried out by the UK Office of National Statistics in a population-based sample of 1095 women aged 18-74. Demographic and personal correlates of attitudes to risk-stratified OC screening based on prior genetic risk assessment were determined using univariate analyses and adjusted logistic regression models. Full data on the key analytic questions were available for 829 respondents (mean age 46 years; 27 % 'university educated'; 93 % 'White'). Relatively few respondents felt they were at 'higher' or 'much higher' risk of OC than other women of their age group (7.4 %, n = 61). Most women (85 %) said they would 'probably' or 'definitely' take up OC genetic testing; which increased to 88 % if the test also informed about breast cancer risk. Almost all women (92 %) thought they would 'probably' or 'definitely' participate in risk-stratified OC screening. In multivariate logistic regression models, university level education was associated with lower anticipated uptake of genetic testing (p = 0.009), but with more positive attitudes toward risk-stratified screening (p <0.001). Perceived risk was not significantly associated with any of the outcome variables. These findings give confidence in taking forward research on integration of novel genomic technologies into mainstream healthcare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 16%
Student > Master 8 16%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 4 8%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 10%
Social Sciences 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Psychology 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2016.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#1,564
of 2,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,400
of 369,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#18
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,007 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 369,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.