Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology
Authors: Volandes AE, Paasche-Orlow MK, Mitchell SL, El-Jawahri A, Davis AD, Barry MJ, Hartshorn KL, Jackson VA, Gillick MR, Walker-Corkery ES, Chang Y, López L, Kemeny M, Bulone L, Mann E, Misra S, Peachey M, Abbo ED, Eichler AF, Epstein AS, Noy A, Levin TT, Temel JS
Volume 172 of Issue 22 | Archives of internal medicine
Authors: Minichiello T
The New England journal of medicine
Authors: Ryan CJ, Smith MR, de Bono JS, Molina A, Logothetis CJ, de Souza P, Fizazi K, Mainwaring P, Piulats JM, Ng S, Carles J, Mulders PF, Basch E, Small EJ, Saad F, Schrijvers D, Van Poppel H, Mukherjee SD, Suttmann H, Gerritsen WR, Flaig TW, George DJ, Yu EY, Efstathiou E, Pantuck A, Winquist E, Higano CS, Taplin ME, Park Y, Kheoh T, Griffin T, Scher HI, Rathkopf DE
Authors: Neilan TG, Coelho-Filho OR, Shah RV, Feng JH, Pena-Herrera D, Mandry D, Pierre-Mongeon F, Heydari B, Francis SA, Moslehi J, Kwong RY, Jerosch-Herold M
International journal of oncology
Authors: Lee HK, Park GB, Kim YS, Song H, Broaddus VC, Hur DY
Volume 77 of Issue 2 | Gastrointestinal endoscopy
Authors:
Volume 15 of Issue 6 | Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics
Authors: Scheuner MT, Edelen MO, Hilborne LH, Lubin IM, RAND Molecular Genetic Test Report Advisory Board
PURPOSE
We evaluated a template for molecular genetic test reports that was developed as a strategy to reduce communication errors between the laboratory and ordering clinician.
METHODS
We surveyed 1,600 primary care physicians to assess satisfaction, ease of use, and effectiveness of genetic test reports developed using our template and reports developed by clinical laboratories. Mean score differences of responses between the reports were compared using t-tests. Two-way analysis of variance evaluated the effect of template versus standard reports and the influence of physician characteristics.
RESULTS
There were 396 (24%) respondents. Template reports had higher scores than the standard reports for each survey item. The gender and specialty of the physician did not influence scores; however, younger physicians gave higher scores regardless of report type. There was significant interaction between report type and whether physicians ordered or reviewed any genetic tests (none versus at least one) in the past year, P = 0.005.
CONCLUSION
For each survey item assessing satisfaction, ease of use, and effectiveness, physicians gave higher ratings to genetic test reports developed with the template than standard reports used by clinical laboratories. Physicians least familiar with genetic test reports, and possibly having the greatest need for better communication, were best served by the template reports.
View on PubMed
Science (New York, N.Y.)
Authors: Shimazu T, Hirschey MD, Newman J, He W, Shirakawa K, Le Moan N, Grueter CA, Lim H, Saunders LR, Stevens RD, Newgard CB, Farese RV, de Cabo R, Ulrich S, Akassoglou K, Verdin E
FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
Authors: Roux J, McNicholas CM, Carles M, Goolaerts A, Houseman BT, Dickinson DA, Iles KE, Ware LB, Matthay MA, Pittet JF
The New England journal of medicine
Authors: Bhave PD, Foster E, Dhaliwal G