Improving the referral process for familial breast cancer genetic counselling: findings of three randomised controlled trials of two interventions.

Wilson, BJ; Torrance, N; Mollison, J; Wordsworth, S; Gray, JR; Haites, NE; Grant, A; Campbell, MK; Miedyzbrodzka, Z; Clarke, A; Watson, MS; Douglas, A

Abstract:

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two complementary interventions, using familial breast cancer as a model condition. The primary care intervention consisted of providing computerised referral guidelines and related education to GPs. The nurse counsellor intervention evaluated genetic nurses as substitutes for specialist geneticists in the initial assessment and management of referred patients. DESIGN: The computerised referral guidelines study was a pragmati...

Expand abstract

Actions

Email

Email this record

Send the bibliographic details of this record to your email address.

Your Email
Please enter the email address that the record information will be sent to.

-
Your message (optional)
Please add any additional information to be included within the email.
Cite

Cite this record

APA Style

Wilson, B. J., Torrance, N., Mollison, J., Wordsworth, S., Gray, J. R., Haites, N. E., Grant, A., Campbell, M. K., Miedyzbrodzka, Z., Clarke, A., Watson, M. S., & Douglas, A. (2005). Improving the referral process for familial breast cancer genetic counselling: findings of three randomised controlled trials of two interventions. Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England), 9(3), iii-126.

MLA Style

Wilson, B. J., et al. “Improving the Referral Process for Familial Breast Cancer Genetic Counselling: Findings of Three Randomised Controlled Trials of Two Interventions.” Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England), vol. 9, no. 3, 2005, pp. iii-126.

Chicago Style

Wilson, BJ, N Torrance, J Mollison, S Wordsworth, JR Gray, NE Haites, A Grant, et al. 2005. “Improving the Referral Process for Familial Breast Cancer Genetic Counselling: Findings of Three Randomised Controlled Trials of Two Interventions.” Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England) 9 (3): iii-126.
Tweet
Print