Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 22

Cited In for PubMed (Select 10207639)

1.

Long-term psychosocial and behavioral adjustment in individuals receiving genetic test results in Lynch syndrome.

Esplen MJ, Wong J, Aronson M, Butler K, Rothenmund H, Semotiuk K, Madlensky L, Way C, Dicks E, Green J, Gallinger S.

Clin Genet. 2015 Jun;87(6):525-32. doi: 10.1111/cge.12509. Epub 2014 Oct 28.

PMID:
25297893
2.

What Factors Impact upon a Woman's Decision to Undertake Genetic Cancer Testing?

Quinlivan JA, Battikhi Z, Petersen RW.

Front Oncol. 2014 Jan 6;3:325. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00325. eCollection 2014 Jan 6.

3.

Communication and technology in genetic counseling for familial cancer.

Lynch HT, Snyder C, Stacey M, Olson B, Peterson SK, Buxbaum S, Shaw T, Lynch PM.

Clin Genet. 2014 Mar;85(3):213-22. doi: 10.1111/cge.12317. Epub 2013 Dec 20.

4.

Reflex testing for Lynch syndrome: if we build it, will they come? Lessons learned from the uptake of clinical genetics services by individuals with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC).

Tomiak E, Samson A, Spector N, Mackey M, Gilpin C, Smith E, Jonker D, Allanson J, Asmis T.

Fam Cancer. 2014 Mar;13(1):75-82. doi: 10.1007/s10689-013-9677-0.

5.

Health behaviors in patients and families with hereditary colorectal cancer.

Burton AM, Hovick SR, Peterson SK.

Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2012 Jun;25(2):111-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1313782.

6.

Screening and Health Behaviors among Persons Diagnosed with Familial Adenomatous Polyposis and Their Relatives.

James AS, Chisholm P, Wolin KY, Baxter M, Kaphingst K, Davidson NO.

J Cancer Epidemiol. 2012;2012:506410. doi: 10.1155/2012/506410. Epub 2012 Jul 29.

7.

The role of distress in uptake and response to predisposition genetic testing: the BMPR2 experience.

Jones DL, Clayton EW.

Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2012 Mar;16(3):203-9. doi: 10.1089/gtmb.2011.0059. Epub 2011 Nov 15.

8.

Development and validation of an instrument to measure the impact of genetic testing on self-concept in Lynch syndrome.

Esplen MJ, Stuckless N, Gallinger S, Aronson M, Rothenmund H, Semotiuk K, Stokes J, Way C, Green J, Butler K, Petersen HV, Wong J.

Clin Genet. 2011 Nov;80(5):415-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2011.01770.x. Epub 2011 Oct 3.

9.

Using a family history intervention to improve cancer risk perception in a black community.

Murthy VS, Garza MA, Almario DA, Vogel KJ, Grubs RE, Gettig EA, Wilson JW, Thomas SB.

J Genet Couns. 2011 Dec;20(6):639-49. doi: 10.1007/s10897-011-9389-2. Epub 2011 Jul 20.

10.

Changes in risk perceptions in relation to self-reported colorectal cancer screening among first-degree relatives of colorectal cancer cases enrolled in a randomized trial.

Glenn BA, Herrmann AK, Crespi CM, Mojica CM, Chang LC, Maxwell AE, Bastani R.

Health Psychol. 2011 Jul;30(4):481-91. doi: 10.1037/a0024288.

11.

Factors influencing cancer risk perception in high risk populations: a systematic review.

Tilburt JC, James KM, Sinicrope PS, Eton DT, Costello BA, Carey J, Lane MA, Ehlers SL, Erwin PJ, Nowakowski KE, Murad MH.

Hered Cancer Clin Pract. 2011 May 19;9:2. doi: 10.1186/1897-4287-9-2.

12.

Parental attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about genetic testing for FAP and colorectal cancer surveillance in minors.

Levine FR, Coxworth JE, Stevenson DA, Tuohy T, Burt RW, Kinney AY.

J Genet Couns. 2010 Jun;19(3):269-79. doi: 10.1007/s10897-010-9285-1. Epub 2010 Mar 2.

13.

An examination of the psychosocial factors influencing colorectal cancer patients' communication of colorectal cancer patient risk with their siblings.

Lawsin C, Duhamel K, Itzkowitz S, Brown K, Lim H, Jandorf L.

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Nov;18(11):2907-12. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2558.

14.

Risk perception and preference for prevention of Alzheimer's disease.

Chung S, Mehta K, Shumway M, Alvidrez J, Perez-Stable EJ.

Value Health. 2009 Jun;12(4):450-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00482.x. Epub 2009 Jan 12.

15.

Genetic testing for Lynch syndrome in the first year of colorectal cancer: a review of the psychological impact.

Landsbergen KM, Prins JB, Brunner HG, Kraaimaat FW, Hoogerbrugge N.

Fam Cancer. 2009;8(4):325-37. doi: 10.1007/s10689-009-9239-7. Epub 2009 Mar 28. Review.

16.

EGAPP supplementary evidence review: DNA testing strategies aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome.

Palomaki GE, McClain MR, Melillo S, Hampel HL, Thibodeau SN.

Genet Med. 2009 Jan;11(1):42-65. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31818fa2db. Review. No abstract available.

17.

The withdrawal from oncogenetic counselling and testing for hereditary and familial breast and ovarian cancer. A descriptive study of an Italian sample.

Caruso A, Vigna C, Maggi G, Sega FM, Cognetti F, Savarese A.

J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Nov 24;27:75. doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-27-75.

18.

Challenges to the translation of genomic information into clinical practice and health policy: Utilization, preferences and economic value.

Phillips KA, Liang SY, Van Bebber S; Canpers Research Group.

Curr Opin Mol Ther. 2008 Jun;10(3):260-6. Review.

19.

Cancers related to genetic mutations: important psychosocial issues for Canadian family physicians.

Power TE, Robinson J.

Can Fam Physician. 2006 Nov;52(11):1425-31. Review. Erratum in: Can Fam Physician. 2007 Feb;53(2):218.

20.

Non-compliance in surveillance for patients with previous resection of large (> or = 1 cm) colorectal adenomas.

Brueckl WM, Fritsche B, Seifert B, Boxberger F, Albrecht H, Croner RS, Wein A, Hahn EG.

World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Dec 7;12(45):7313-8.

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk