ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences with implementing the Rosa chatbot in mainstream genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and Usability Testing of an Information Needs-Based Chatbot for Individuals With Pathogenic Variants in BRCA Genes in Korea: A Methodological Study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences with implementing the Rosa chatbot in mainstream genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Leveraging AI chatbots in supporting breast and ovarian cancer patients: A scoping review.Digital healthReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mainstream genetic testing (MGT) refers to genetic testing conducted at the time of a cancer diagnosis without undergoing comprehensive genetic counseling. MGT has been the standard of care for patients with breast or ovarian cancer in Norway for several years. The aim of this study is to explore how newly diagnosed patients with breast or ovarian cancer and healthcare professionals' (HCPs), experience the use of the Rosa chatbot in mainstream genetic testing (MGT) and explore potential barriers to the implementation of chatbots in MGT. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interview guides with selected patients and HCPs. The interviews were done either: in-person, over the digital platform Teams, or over the telephone, depending on the participants' wishes. We chose the Stepwise-Deductive Inductive approach for analyzing the transcripts. Both patients and HCPs viewed the Rosa chatbot positively, describing it as user-friendly, useful, accessible, safe, professional, and trustworthy. They reported that the volume and complexity of information during MGT could be overwhelming and viewed the chatbot as a trustworthy resource for patients to revisit at their own pace, supporting informed decision-making after a positive genetic test result. However, concerns were raised about potential misunderstandings, the impersonal nature of digital communication, and the risk of reduced patient-provider interaction, which together were perceived as an emotional barrier to integrating chatbots into genetic counseling practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.