The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effect of a Computer-Based Decision Aid on Knowledge, Perceptions, and Intentions About Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer Susceptibility: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: As the availability of and demand for genetic testing for hereditary cancers increases in primary care and other clinical settings, alternative or adjunct educational methods to traditional genetic counseling will be needed. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of a computer-based decision aid with standard genetic counseling for educating women about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial conducted from May 2000 to September 2002. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Outpatient clinics offering cancer genetic counseling at 6 US medical centers enrolled 211 women with personal or family histories of breast cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Standard one-on-one genetic counseling (n = 105) or education by a computer program followed by genetic counseling (n = 106). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Participants' knowledge, risk perception, intention to undergo genetic testing, decisional conflict, satisfaction with decision, anxiety, and satisfaction with the intervention. Counselor group measures were administered at baseline and after counseling. Computer group measures were administered at baseline, after computer use, and after counseling. Testing decisions were assessed at 1 and 6 months. Outcomes were analyzed by high vs low risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable demographics, prior computer experience, medical literacy, and baseline knowledge of breast cancer and genetic testing, and both counseling and computer use were rated highly. Knowledge scores increased in both groups (P<.001) regardless of risk status, and change in knowledge was greater in the computer group compared with the counselor group (P =.03) among women at low risk of carrying a mutation. Perception of absolute risk of breast cancer decreased significantly after either intervention among all participants. Intention to undergo testing decreased significantly after either intervention among low-risk but not high-risk women. The counselor group had lower mean scores on a decisional conflict scale (P =.04) and, in low-risk women, higher mean scores on a satisfaction-with-decision scale (P =.001). Mean state anxiety scores were reduced by counseling but were within normal ranges for both groups at baseline and after either intervention, regardless of risk status. CONCLUSIONS: An interactive computer program was more effective than standard genetic counseling for increasing knowledge of breast cancer and genetic testing among women at low risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. However, genetic counseling was more effective than the computer at reducing women's anxiety and facilitating more accurate risk perceptions. These results suggest that this computer program has the potential to stand alone as an educational intervention for low-risk women but should be used as a supplement to genetic counseling for those at high risk.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions
Stacey, D., Légaré, F., Lewis, K., Barry, M. J., Bennett, C. L., Eden, K. B., Holmes-Rovner, M., Llewellyn-Thomas, H., Lyddiatt, A., Thomson, R., et al. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001431.pub5 · Cited by 6,685
Rethinking Informed Consent: The Case for Shared Medical Decision-Making
King, J. S., & Moulton, B. W. (2006) · American Journal of Law & Medicine · doi:10.1177/009885880603200401 · Cited by 276
Durand, M.-A., Witt, J., Joseph-Williams, N., Newcombe, R. G., Politi, M. C., Sivell, S., & Elwyn, G. (2015) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.12.009 · Cited by 69
Metadata
- Authors
- Green, M. J., Peterson, S. K., Baker, M. W., Harper, G. R., Friedman, L. C., Rubinstein, W. S., & Mauger, D. T.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2004-07-28
- Volume
- 292
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 442
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2071149629
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effect of a Computer-Based Decision Aid on Knowledge, Perceptions, and Intentions About Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer Susceptibility: A Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.292.4.442
- The paper
- Green, M. J., Peterson, S. K., Baker, M. W., Harper, G. R., Friedman, L. C., Rubinstein, W. S., & Mauger, D. T. (2004). Effect of a Computer-Based Decision Aid on Knowledge, Perceptions, and Intentions About Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer Susceptibility: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.4.442
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.