SwePub
Tyck till om SwePub Sök här!
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

WFRF:(Tischkowitz Marc)
 

Search: WFRF:(Tischkowitz Marc) > Use of the BOADICEA...

Use of the BOADICEA Web Application in clinical practice : appraisals by clinicians from various countries

Brédart, Anne (author)
Paris Descartes University,Curie Institute, Paris
Kop, Jean Luc (author)
University of Lorraine
Antoniou, Antonis C. (author)
University of Cambridge
show more...
Cunningham, Alex P. (author)
University of Cambridge
de Pauw, Antoine (author)
Curie Institute, Paris
Tischkowitz, Marc (author)
University of Cambridge
Ehrencrona, Hans (author)
Lund University,Lunds universitet,Avdelningen för klinisk genetik,Institutionen för laboratoriemedicin,Medicinska fakulteten,Division of Clinical Genetics,Department of Laboratory Medicine,Faculty of Medicine,Skåne University Hospital
Dolbeault, Sylvie (author)
University of Paris-Saclay,Curie Institute, Paris
Robieux, Léonore (author)
Paris Descartes University
Rhiem, Kerstin (author)
University Hospital of Cologne
Easton, Douglas F. (author)
University of Cambridge
Devilee, Peter (author)
Leiden University Medical Centre
Stoppa-Lyonnet, Dominique (author)
Curie Institute, Paris
Schmutlzer, Rita (author)
University Hospital of Cologne
show less...
 (creator_code:org_t)
2017-06-16
2018
English.
In: Familial Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1389-9600 .- 1573-7292. ; 17:1, s. 31-41
  • Journal article (peer-reviewed)
Abstract Subject headings
Close  
  • The ‘BOADICEA’ Web Application (BWA) used to assess breast cancer risk, is currently being further developed, to integrate additional genetic and non-genetic factors. We surveyed clinicians’ perceived acceptability of the existing BWA v3. An online survey was conducted through the BOADICEA website, and the British, Dutch, French and Swedish genetics societies. Cross-sectional data from 443 participants who provided at least 50% responses were analysed. Respondents varied in age and, clinical seniority, but mainly comprised women (77%) and genetics professionals (82%). Some expressed negative opinions about the scientific validity of BOADICEA (9%) and BWA v3 risk presentations (7–9%). Data entry time (62%), clinical utility (22%) and ease of communicating BWA v3 risks (13–17%) received additional negative appraisals. In multivariate analyses, controlling for gender and country, data entry time was perceived as longer by genetic counsellors than clinical geneticists (p < 0.05). Respondents who (1) considered hormonal BC risk factors as more important (p < 0.01), and (2) communicated numerical risk estimates more frequently (p < 0.001), judged BWA v3 of lower clinical utility. Respondents who carried out less frequent clinical activity (p < 0.01) and respondents with ‘11 to 15 years’ seniority (p < 0.01) had less favourable opinions of BWA v3 risk presentations. Seniority of ‘6 to 10 years’ (p < 0.05) and more frequent numerical risk communication (p < 0.05) were associated with higher fear of communicating the BWA v3 risks to patients. The level of genetics training did not affect opinions. Further development of BWA should consider technological, genetics service delivery and training initiatives.

Subject headings

MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAP  -- Klinisk medicin -- Cancer och onkologi (hsv//swe)
MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES  -- Clinical Medicine -- Cancer and Oncology (hsv//eng)

Keyword

Appraisal
Breast cancer
Clinical practice
Risk prediction model
Survey
Tool

Publication and Content Type

art (subject category)
ref (subject category)

Find in a library

To the university's database

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view