Biomedical subjects

John M Quillin

Publications and source records attributed to John M Quillin.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Spiritual coping, family history, and perceived risk for breast cancer--can we make sense of it?

Differences in spiritual beliefs and practices could influence perceptions of the role of genetic risk factors on personal cancer risk. We explored spiritual coping and breast cancer risk perceptions among women with and without a reported family history of breast cancer. Analyses were conducted on data from 899 women in primary care clinics who did not have breast cancer. Structural equation modeling (SEM), linear, and logistic modeling tested an interaction of family history of breast cancer on the relationship between spiritual coping and risk perceptions. Overall analyses demonstrated an inverse relationship between spiritual coping and breast cancer risk perceptions and a modifying effect of family history. More frequent spiritual coping was associated with lower risk perceptions for women with positive family histories, but not for those with negative family histories. Results support further research in this area that could influence communication of risk information to cancer genetic counseling patients.

Adaptation, Psychological↗

PubMed2006

Paternal relatives and family history of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Reported family medical history may be the most widely accessible genomics screen currently available. The worth of any population-screening tool may be measured by parameters such as sensitivity and specificity. There is some evidence and theory suggesting that family history of breast cancer may be more frequently communicated about maternal (versus paternal) lines. If true, a discrepancy in reporting family history of breast cancer could mean suboptimal accuracy for this genomics-screening tool. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis of reported family history of breast cancer was conducted beginning in early fall 2005 of data collected from April 2003 to March 2005. Study participants were Women's Health Clinic patients without breast cancer aged at least 40 years. The number of women reporting extended paternal relatives (e.g., aunts, grandmothers) with breast cancer was compared to the number of women reporting maternal relatives. RESULTS: More women reported a maternal relative with breast cancer (16%) compared to those reporting paternal relatives (10%) (McNemar odds ratio = 1.71, 95% confidence interval = 1.26 to 2.34). A discrepancy remained in analyses adjusting for potential covariates (race/ethnicity, awareness of breast cancer, family communication about breast cancer, and perceived risk). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported family history of breast cancer may not optimally capture inherited risk from the father's side of the family. Further research is needed to look for modifiable contributors to this discrepancy to optimize screening for familial breast cancer.

Adult↗

PubMed2004

Gail model risk assessment and risk perceptions.

Patients can benefit from accessible breast cancer risk information. The Gail model is a well-known means of providing risk information to patients and for guiding clinical decisions. Risk presentation often includes 5-year and life-time percent chances for a woman to develop breast cancer. How do women perceive their risks after Gail model risk assessment? This exploratory study used a randomized clinical trial design to address this question among women not previously selected for breast cancer risk. Results suggest a brief risk assessment intervention changes quantitative and comparative risk perceptions and improves accuracy. This study improves our understanding of risk perceptions by evaluating an intervention in a population not previously selected for high-risk status and measuring perceptions in a variety of formats.

Adult↗

PubMedDate not supplied

The link between providers and patients: how laboratories can ensure quality results with genetic testing.

Advances in genetic testing technology can provide important opportunities for health improvement. Simultaneously, they entail complexity in laboratory analysis and interpretation. The nature of genetic testing may engender implications distinct from other diagnostic tests. In this article, we summarize these implications, including the role of informed consent; quality assurance in diagnostic testing services; interpretation of the test results; patient support; appropriate disclosure; and regulations relevant for laboratories involved with genetic tests. Research and clinical laboratories need to stay abreast of these advancing technologies and their implications for health-care patients and providers. Collaboration between testing personnel, geneticists, and other health-care providers is necessary to ensure that patients receive the full benefits from testing, including a clear understanding of their genetic test information.

Adult↗