31 results on '"Smit, Amelia K."'
Search Results
2. A 10-year update to the principles for clinical trial data sharing by pharmaceutical companies: perspectives based on a decade of literature and policies
- Author
-
Modi, Natansh D., Kichenadasse, Ganessan, Hoffmann, Tammy C., Haseloff, Mark, Logan, Jessica M., Veroniki, Areti A., Venchiarutti, Rebecca L., Smit, Amelia K., Tuffaha, Haitham, Jayasekara, Harindra, Manning-Bennet, Arkady, Morton, Erin, McKinnon, Ross A., Rowland, Andrew, Sorich, Michael J., and Hopkins, Ashley M.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
3. Long-term cost-effectiveness of a melanoma prevention program using genomic risk information compared with standard prevention advice in Australia
- Author
-
Newson, Ainsley J., Morton, Rachael L., Kimlin, Michael, Keogh, Louise, Law, Matthew, Kirk, Judy, Dobbinson, Suzanne J., Kanetsky, Peter, Mann, Graham, Dawkins, Hugh, Savard, Jacqueline, Dunlop, Kate, Trevena, Lyndal, Jenkins, Mark, Allen, Martin, Butow, Phyllis, Wordsworth, Sarah, Lo, Serigne, Low, Cynthia, Smit, Amelia K., Espinoza, David, Cust, Anne E., Law, Chi Kin, Fernandez-Penas, Pablo, Nieweg, Omgo E., and Menzies, Alexander M.
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
4. Patient demographic characteristics and risk factors associated with sun protection behaviours in specialist melanoma clinics
- Author
-
Smith, Juliet, primary, Espinoza, David, additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Gallo, Bruna, additional, Smith, Andrea L., additional, Lo, Serigne N., additional, Guitera, Pascale, additional, Martin, Linda K., additional, and Cust, Anne E., additional
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
5. Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K., Allen, Martin, Beswick, Brooke, Butow, Phyllis, Dawkins, Hugh, Dobbinson, Suzanne J., Dunlop, Kate L., Espinoza, David, Fenton, Georgina, Kanetsky, Peter A., Keogh, Louise, Kimlin, Michael G., Kirk, Judy, Law, Matthew H., Lo, Serigne, Low, Cynthia, Mann, Graham J., Reyes-Marcelino, Gillian, Morton, Rachael L., Newson, Ainsley J., Savard, Jacqueline, Trevena, Lyndal, Wordsworth, Sarah, and Cust, Anne E.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
6. A review of skin cancer primary prevention activities in primary care settings.
- Author
-
Singh, Nehal, Dunlop, Kate L. A., Woolley, Nikki, Vashishtha, Tracey Wills, Damian, Diona L., Vuong, Kylie, Cust, Anne E., and Smit, Amelia K.
- Subjects
SKIN cancer ,CANCER prevention ,ULTRAVIOLET radiation ,PRIMARY care ,SKIN disease prevention - Abstract
Objectives: Skin cancer is highly preventable through primary prevention activities such as avoiding ultraviolet radiation exposure during peak times and regular use of sun protection. General practitioners (GPs) and primary care nurses have key responsibilities in promoting sustained primary prevention behaviour. We aimed to review the evidence on skin cancer primary prevention activities in primary care settings, including evidence on feasibility, effectiveness, barriers and enablers. Study type: Rapid review and narrative synthesis. Methods: We searched published literature from January 2011 to October 2022 in Embase, Medline, PsychInfo, Scopus, Cochrane Central and CINAHL. The search was limited to skin cancer primary prevention activities within primary care settings, for studies or programs conducted in Australia or countries with comparable health systems. Analysis of barriers and enablers was informed by an implementation science framework. Results: A total of 31 peer-reviewed journal articles were included in the review. We identified four main primary prevention activities: education and training programs for GPs; behavioural counselling on prevention; the use of novel risk assessment tools and provision of risk-tailored prevention strategies; and new technologies to support early detection that have accompanying primary prevention advice. Enablers to delivering skin cancer primary prevention in primary care included pairing preventive activities with early detection activities, and access to patient resources and programs that fit with existing workflows and systems. Barriers included unclear requirements for skin cancer prevention counselling, competing demandswithin the consultation and limited access to primary care services, especially in regional and remote areas. Conclusions: These findings highlight potential opportunities for improving skin cancer prevention activities in primary care. Ensuring ease of program delivery, integration with early detection and availability of resources such as risk assessment tools are enablers to encourage and increase uptake of primary prevention behaviours in primary care, for both practitioners and patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
7. Precision Public Health Initiatives in Cancer: Proceedings from the Transdisciplinary Conference for Future Leaders in Precision Public Health
- Author
-
Allen, Caitlin G., Turbitt, Erin, Smit, Amelia K., Passero, Lauren E., Olstad, Dana Lee, Hatch, Ashley, Landry, Latrice, and Roberts, Megan C.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
8. Acceptability and appropriateness of a risk-tailored organised melanoma screening program: Qualitative interviews with key informants
- Author
-
Dunlop, Kate L. A., primary, Keogh, Louise A., additional, Smith, Andrea L., additional, Aranda, Sanchia, additional, Aitken, Joanne, additional, Watts, Caroline G., additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Janda, Monika, additional, Mann, Graham J., additional, Cust, Anne E., additional, and Rankin, Nicole M., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
9. Acceptability of risk-tailored cancer screening among Australian GPs: a qualitative study.
- Author
-
LA Dunlop, Kate, Smit, Amelia K, Keogh, Louise A, Newson, Ainsley J, Rankin, Nicole M, and Cust, Anne E
- Subjects
EARLY detection of cancer ,MEDICAL screening ,QUALITATIVE research ,PROFESSIONAL education ,SEMI-structured interviews - Abstract
Background: Cancer screening that is tailored to individual risk has the potential to improve health outcomes and reduce screening-related harms, if implemented well. However, successful implementation depends on acceptability, particularly as this approach will require GPs to change their practice. Aim: To explore Australian GPs' views about the acceptability of risk-tailored screening across cancer types and to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation. Design and setting: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Australian GPs. Method: Interviews were carried out with GPs and audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were first analysed inductively then deductively using an implementation framework. Results: Participants (n = 20) found risk-tailored screening to be acceptable in principle, recognising potential benefits in offering enhanced screening to those at highest risk. However, they had significant concerns that changes in screening advice could potentially cause confusion. They also reported that a reduced screening frequency or exclusion from a screening programme for those deemed low risk may not initially be acceptable, especially for common cancers with minimally invasive screening. Other reservations about implementing risk-tailored screening in general practice included a lack of high-quality evidence of benefit, fear of missing the signs or symptoms of a patient's cancer, and inadequate time with patients. While no single preferred approach to professional education was identified, education around communicating screening results and risk stratification was considered important. Conclusion: GPs may not currently be convinced of the net benefits of risk-tailored screening. Development of accessible evidence-based guidelines, professional education, risk calculators, and targeted public messages will increase its feasibility in general practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
10. Advancing precision public health using human genomics: examples from the field and future research opportunities
- Author
-
Roberts, Megan C., Fohner, Alison E., Landry, Latrice, Olstad, Dana Lee, Smit, Amelia K., Turbitt, Erin, and Allen, Caitlin G.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
11. Can patient-led surveillance detect subsequent new primary or recurrent melanomas and reduce the need for routinely scheduled follow-up? A protocol for the MEL-SELF randomised controlled trial
- Author
-
Ackermann, Deonna M., Smit, Amelia K., Janda, Monika, van Kemenade, Cathelijne H., Dieng, Mbathio, Morton, Rachael L., Turner, Robin M., Cust, Anne E., Irwig, Les, Hersch, Jolyn K., Guitera, Pascale, Soyer, H. Peter, Mar, Victoria, Saw, Robyn P. M., Low, Donald, Low, Cynthia, Drabarek, Dorothy, Espinoza, David, Emery, Jon, Murchie, Peter, Thompson, John F., Scolyer, Richard A., Azzi, Anthony, Lilleyman, Alister, and Bell, Katy J. L.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
12. Unpacking factors contributing to melanoma overdiagnosis: does polygenic risk play a role?
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K, primary and Cust, Anne E, additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
13. Long-term cost-effectiveness of a melanoma prevention program using genomic risk information compared with standard prevention advice in Australia
- Author
-
Law, Chi Kin, primary, Cust, Anne E., additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Trevena, Lyndal, additional, Fernandez-Penas, Pablo, additional, Nieweg, Omgo E., additional, Menzies, Alexander M., additional, Wordsworth, Sarah, additional, and Morton, Rachael L., additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
14. Acceptability of risk-tailored cancer screening among Australian GPs: a qualitative study
- Author
-
LA Dunlop, Kate, primary, Smit, Amelia K, additional, Keogh, Louise A, additional, Newson, Ainsley J, additional, Rankin, Nicole M, additional, and Cust, Anne E, additional
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
15. Supplementary materials (clean version) from A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of Giving Information on Personalized Genomic Risk of Melanoma to the Public
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K., primary, Espinoza, David, primary, Newson, Ainsley J., primary, Morton, Rachael L., primary, Fenton, Georgina, primary, Freeman, Lucinda, primary, Dunlop, Kate, primary, Butow, Phyllis N., primary, Law, Matthew H., primary, Kimlin, Michael G., primary, Keogh, Louise A., primary, Dobbinson, Suzanne J., primary, Kirk, Judy, primary, Kanetsky, Peter A., primary, Mann, Graham J., primary, and Cust, Anne E., primary
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
16. Personalised risk booklet - an example from A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility, Acceptability, and Impact of Giving Information on Personalized Genomic Risk of Melanoma to the Public
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K., primary, Espinoza, David, primary, Newson, Ainsley J., primary, Morton, Rachael L., primary, Fenton, Georgina, primary, Freeman, Lucinda, primary, Dunlop, Kate, primary, Butow, Phyllis N., primary, Law, Matthew H., primary, Kimlin, Michael G., primary, Keogh, Louise A., primary, Dobbinson, Suzanne J., primary, Kirk, Judy, primary, Kanetsky, Peter A., primary, Mann, Graham J., primary, and Cust, Anne E., primary
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
17. Views of the Australian public on the delivery of risk-stratified cancer screening in the population: a qualitative study.
- Author
-
Dunlop, Kate L. A., Rankin, Nicole M., Smit, Amelia K., Newson, Ainsley J., Keogh, Louise A., and Cust, Anne E.
- Subjects
CANCER treatment ,PUBLIC health ,DISEASE risk factors ,WELL-being ,QUALITY of life - Abstract
Objective and importance of study: Risk-stratified approaches to cancer screening aim to provide tailored risk advice to individuals, rather than the mostly one-size-fits-all approach designed for the average person that is currently used in Australia. Stratified cancer screening has the potential to increase the benefits and reduce the harms of screening. Initial risk assessment is a crucial first step for screening programs that use risk stratification. We report findings from a qualitative study exploring the views of the Australian public on how to best deliver risk-stratified cancer screening in the population to help inform future implementation. Study type: Qualitative interview study. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with participants from a previous study, half of whom had received personal genomic risk information and half of whom had not. We asked how and where they would like to see risk-stratified screening delivered and how they felt about different health professionals assessing their cancer risk. Data were analysed thematically. Results: Forty interviews were conducted. The age range of participants was 21-68 years; 58% were female. Themes included: 1) Convenience is a priority; 2) General practice is a good fit for some; 3) Web-based technology is part of the process; and 4) "I would want to know why [I was being stratified]". Similar views were expressed by both groups. Our findings suggest that although health professionals were identified as having an important role, there were mixed preferences for delivery by general practitioners, medical specialists or nurses. Participants were less concerned about who undertook the risk assessment than whether the health professional had the appropriate skill set and availability. Clear communication and evidence of the need for change in screening eligibility and frequency were key factors in the successful delivery of risk-stratified screening. Conclusion: We identified that convenience and good communication, including clear explanations to the public with convincing evidence for change, will enable the successful delivery of risk-stratified cancer screening in the population, including organised and opportunistic screening approaches. Health professional education and upskilling across disciplines will be key facilitators. Engagement and further consultation with primary care and other key stakeholders will be central. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
18. Validation of self-reported sun exposure against electronic ultraviolet radiation dosimeters
- Author
-
Zhang, Ran, primary, Smit, Amelia K, additional, Espinoza, David, additional, Allen, Martin, additional, Reyes-Marcelino, Gillian, additional, Kimlin, Michael G, additional, Lo, Serigne N, additional, Sharman, Ashleigh R, additional, Law, Matthew H, additional, Kanetsky, Peter A, additional, Mann, Graham J, additional, and Cust, Anne E, additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
19. Barriers and Facilitators for Population Genetic Screening in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review
- Author
-
Shen, Emily C., primary, Srinivasan, Swetha, additional, Passero, Lauren E., additional, Allen, Caitlin G., additional, Dixon, Madison, additional, Foss, Kimberly, additional, Halliburton, Brianna, additional, Milko, Laura V., additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Carlson, Rebecca, additional, and Roberts, Megan C., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
20. Using a Participatory Approach to Develop Research Priorities for Future Leaders in Cancer-Related Precision Public Health
- Author
-
Roberts, Megan C., primary, Mader, June Mullaney, additional, Turbitt, Erin, additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Landry, Latrice, additional, Olstad, Dana Lee, additional, Passero, Lauren E., additional, and Allen, Caitlin G., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
21. Cost-effectiveness of targeted genomic risk provision to prevent skin cancer: Results of a randomized trial.
- Author
-
Law, Chi Kin, primary, Smit, Amelia K, additional, Cust, Anne E., additional, Trevena, Lyndal, additional, Penas, Pablo Fernandez, additional, Nieweg, Omgo E., additional, Menzies, Alexander M., additional, Wordsworth, Sarah, additional, and Morton, Rachael L., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
22. Independent evaluation of melanoma polygenic risk scores in UK and Australian prospective cohorts*
- Author
-
Steinberg, Julia, primary, Iles, Mark M., additional, Lee, Jin Yee, additional, Wang, Xiaochuan, additional, Law, Matthew H., additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Nguyen‐Dumont, Tu, additional, Giles, Graham G., additional, Southey, Melissa C., additional, Milne, Roger L., additional, Mann, Graham J., additional, Bishop, D. Timothy, additional, MacInnis, Robert J., additional, and Cust, Anne E., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
23. Validation of self-reported sun exposure against electronic ultraviolet radiation dosimeters.
- Author
-
Zhang, Ran, Smit, Amelia K, Espinoza, David, Allen, Martin, Reyes-Marcelino, Gillian, Kimlin, Michael G, Lo, Serigne N, Sharman, Ashleigh R, Law, Matthew H, Kanetsky, Peter A, Mann, Graham J, and Cust, Anne E
- Subjects
- *
SUNSHINE , *DOSIMETERS , *BLAND-Altman plot , *ULTRAVIOLET radiation , *ULTRAVIOLET radiation measurement , *SOLAR ultraviolet radiation - Abstract
From the dosimeter data we derived: (i) time spent outdoors exposed to UV, defined as any 8-s measurements with UV values of >0; and (ii) total standard erythemal doses (SEDs) as a measure of UV dose. Table 1 Spearman rank correlations between weekend and weekday ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure measured as standard erythemal doses (SEDs) using electronic UV dosimeters HT
. Validation, exposure measurement, ultraviolet radiation, dosimetry, questionnaire, skin cancer Keywords: Validation; exposure measurement; ultraviolet radiation; dosimetry; questionnaire; skin cancer EN Validation exposure measurement ultraviolet radiation dosimetry questionnaire skin cancer 324 328 5 02/16/23 20230201 NES 230201 Ultraviolet radiation (UV) exposure is the main risk factor for skin cancer[1] and skin cancer prevention research and health promotion programme evaluation relies on the accurate measurement of sun exposure using questionnaires. [Extracted from the article] - Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
24. Effect of an interactive educational activity using handheld ultraviolet radiation dosimeters on sun protection knowledge among Australian primary school students
- Author
-
Lee Solano, Marco, Robinson, Samuel, Allen, Martin W., Reyes-Marcelino, Gillian, Espinoza, David, Beswick, Brooke, Tse, Dorothy H.K., Ding, Liyang, Humphreys, Lauren, Van Kemenade, Cathelijne, Dobbinson, Suzanne, Smit, Amelia K., and Cust, Anne E.
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
25. Assessing the Potential for Patient-led Surveillance After Treatment of Localized Melanoma (MEL-SELF)
- Author
-
Ackermann, Deonna M., primary, Dieng, Mbathio, additional, Medcalf, Ellie, additional, Jenkins, Marisa C., additional, van Kemenade, Cathelijne H., additional, Janda, Monika, additional, Turner, Robin M., additional, Cust, Anne E., additional, Morton, Rachael L., additional, Irwig, Les, additional, Guitera, Pascale, additional, Soyer, H. Peter, additional, Mar, Victoria, additional, Hersch, Jolyn K., additional, Low, Donald, additional, Low, Cynthia, additional, Saw, Robyn P. M., additional, Scolyer, Richard A., additional, Drabarek, Dorothy, additional, Espinoza, David, additional, Azzi, Anthony, additional, Lilleyman, Alister M., additional, Smit, Amelia K., additional, Murchie, Peter, additional, Thompson, John F., additional, and Bell, Katy J. L., additional
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
26. Effect of an interactive educational activity using handheld ultraviolet radiation dosimeters on sun protection knowledge among Australian primary school students
- Author
-
Solano, Marco Lee, primary, Robinson, Samuel, additional, Allen, Martin W, additional, Reyes-Marcelino, Gillian, additional, Espinoza, David, additional, Beswick, Brooke, additional, Tse, Dorothy Hoi Ki, additional, Ding, Liyang, additional, Humphreys, Lauren, additional, Van Kemenade, Cathelijne, additional, Dobbinson, Suzanne, additional, Smit, Amelia K, additional, and Cust, Anne E, additional
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
27. Communicating Personal Melanoma Polygenic Risk Information: Participants' Experiences of Genetic Counseling in a Community-Based Study.
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K., Espinoza, David, Fenton, Georgina L., Kirk, Judy, Innes, Jessica S., McGovern, Michael, Limb, Sharne, Turbitt, Erin, and Cust, Anne E.
- Subjects
- *
MONOGENIC & polygenic inheritance (Genetics) , *GENETIC counseling , *HEALTH literacy , *MELANOMA , *TELEPHONE calls - Abstract
Personalized polygenic risk information may be used to guide risk-based melanoma prevention and early detection at a population scale, but research on communicating this information is limited. This mixed-methods study aimed to assess the acceptability of a genetic counselor (GC) phone call in communicating polygenic risk information in the Melanoma Genomics Managing Your Risk randomized controlled trial. Participants (n = 509) received personalized melanoma polygenic risk information, an educational booklet on melanoma prevention, and a GC phone call, which was audio-recorded. Participants completed the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Survey 1-month after receiving their risk information (n = 346). A subgroup took part in a qualitative interview post-study completion (n = 20). Survey data were analyzed descriptively using SPSS, and thematic analysis of the qualitative data was conducted using NVivo 12.0 software. The survey showed a high level of acceptability for the GC phone call (mean satisfaction score overall: 4.3 out of 5, standard deviation (SD): 0.6) with differences according to gender (mean score for women: 4.4, SD: 0.6 vs. men: 4.2, SD: 0.7; p = 0.005), health literacy (lower literacy: 4.1, SD: 0.8; average: 4.3, SD: 0.6; higher: 4.4, SD: 0.6: p = 0.02) and polygenic risk group (low risk: 4.5, SD: 0.5, SD: average: 4.3, SD: 0.7, high: 4.3, SD: 0.7; p = 0.03). During the GC phone calls, the discussion predominately related to the impact of past sun exposure on personal melanoma risk. Together our findings point to the importance of further exploring educational and support needs and preferences for communicating personalized melanoma risk among population subgroups, including diverse literacy levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
28. Motivations and Barriers to Participation in a Randomized Trial on Melanoma Genomic Risk: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.
- Author
-
Mercado, Gabriela, Newson, Ainsley J., Espinoza, David, Cust, Anne E., and Smit, Amelia K.
- Subjects
RISK assessment ,MOTIVATION (Psychology) ,PARTICIPATION ,MELANOMA ,RANDOMIZED controlled trials - Abstract
The evolution of polygenic scores for use in for disease prevention and control compels the development of guidelines to optimize their effectiveness and promote equitable use. Understanding the motivations and barriers to participation in genomics research can assist in drafting these standards. We investigated these in a community-based randomized controlled trial that examined the health behavioral impact of receiving personalized melanoma genomic risk information. We examined participant responses in a baseline questionnaire and conducted interviews post-trial participation. Motivations differed in two ways: (1) by gender, with those identifying as women placing greater importance on learning about their personal risk or familial risk, and how to reduce risk; and (2) by age in relation to learning about personal risk, and fear of developing melanoma. A barrier to participation was distrust in the handling of genomic data. Our findings provide new insights into the motivations for participating in genomics research and highlight the need to better target population subgroups including younger men, which will aid in tailoring recruitment for future genomic studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2022
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
29. Knowledge, views and expectations for cancer polygenic risk testing in clinical practice: A cross‐sectional survey of health professionals.
- Author
-
Smit, Amelia K., Sharman, Ashleigh R., Espinoza, David, Wallingford, Courtney, Young, Mary‐Anne, Dunlop, Kate, Tiller, Jane, Newson, Ainsley J., Meiser, Bettina, Cust, Anne E., and Yanes, Tatiane
- Subjects
- *
MEDICAL personnel , *DISEASE risk factors , *HEALTH surveys , *GENERAL practitioners , *QUESTIONNAIRES - Abstract
Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are becoming increasingly available in clinical practice to evaluate cancer risk. However, little is known about health professionals' knowledge, attitudes, and expectations of PRS. An online questionnaire was distributed by relevant health professional organisations predominately in Australia, Canada and the US to evaluate health professionals' knowledge, views and expectations of PRS. Eligible participants were health professionals who provide cancer risk assessments. Results from the questionnaire were analysed descriptively and content analysis was undertaken of free‐text responses. In total, 105 health professionals completed the questionnaire (genetic counsellors 84%; oncologists 6%; clinical geneticists 4%; other 7%). Although responses differed between countries, most participants (61%) had discussed PRS with patients, 20% had ordered a test and 14% had returned test results to a patient. Confidence and knowledge around interpreting PRS were low. Although 69% reported that polygenic testing will certainly or likely influence patient care in the future, most felt unprepared for this. If scaled up to the population, 49% expect that general practitioners would have a primary role in the provision of PRS, supported by genetic health professionals. These findings will inform the development of resources to support health professionals offering polygenic testing, currently and in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
30. Acceptability of risk‐stratified population screening across cancer types: Qualitative interviews with the Australian public.
- Author
-
Dunlop, Kate, Rankin, Nicole M., Smit, Amelia K., Salgado, Zofia, Newson, Ainsley J., Keogh, Louise, and Cust, Anne E.
- Subjects
PUBLIC health surveillance ,INTERVIEWING ,QUALITATIVE research ,TUMORS - Abstract
Background: There is mounting evidence of the benefit of risk‐stratified (risk‐tailored) cancer population screening, when compared to standard approaches. However, shifting towards this approach involves changes to practice that may give rise to implementation challenges. Objectives: To explore the public's potential acceptance of risk‐stratified screening across different cancer types, including reducing screening frequency if at low risk and the use of personal risk information, to inform implementation strategies. Method: Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 40 public participants; half had received personal genomic risk information and half had not. Participants were prompted to consider different cancers. Data were analysed thematically as one dataset. Results: Themes included the following: (a) a sense of security; (b) tailored screening is common sense; (c) risk and the need to take action; (d) not every cancer is the same; and (e) trust and belief in health messages. Both groups expressed similar views. Participants were broadly supportive of risk‐stratified screening across different cancer types, with strong support for increased screening frequency for high‐risk groups. They were less supportive of reduced screening frequency or no screening for low‐risk groups. Findings suggest the public will be amenable to reducing screening when the test is invasive and uncomfortable; be less opposed to forgo screening if offered the opportunity to screen at some stage; and view visible cancers such as melanoma differently. Conclusions: Approaching distinct cancer types differently, tailoring messages for different audiences and understanding reasons for participating in screening may assist with designing future implementation strategies for risk‐stratified cancer screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
31. Thank you to Reviewers 2021.
- Subjects
AFRIKANERS ,ARMENIANS ,BOTANY ,PRESENCE of God ,FEXOFENADINE - Published
- 2023
- Full Text
- View/download PDF
Catalog
Books, media, physical & digital resourcesDiscovery Service for Jio Institute Digital Library
For full access to our library's resources, please sign in.