ArticleCancer2026
Frequency and face validity of reported family history of cancer in first-degree relatives and genetic syndromes among children with cancer in Project:EveryChild: A report from the Children's Oncology Group.
Article in Cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTaking a family history of cancer (FH) is essential for identifying individuals with heritable cancer predisposition. PROJECT: EveryChild (Children's Oncology Group [COG] trial APEC14B1), the registration and biobanking protocol of the COG, includes suggested questions about FH in first-degree relatives and personal history of genetic syndromes (GS) in pediatric oncology patients. The validity of these items is unclear; therefore, the authors assessed the data quality and face validity of the responses.
methodsThe authors analyzed case report forms regarding FH and GS of 30,157 participants (aged birth to 21 years) with newly diagnosed pediatric cancer enrolled in APEC14B1. FH and GS data were manually curated to interpret the responses and group them into categories, followed by face validity assessment-defined as the extent to which the information provided represented what it was intended to capture.
resultsResponses were provided for 65.7% of participants (n = 19,810), with 6.1% reporting FH (n = 1204). Of those, 97.9% (n = 1178) included sufficient free-text detail to assess face validity, although 49.4% required manual interpretation. Among FH reports, 48.3% (n = 595) were suggestive of heritable cancer risk. GS was reported in 4.3% of responders (n = 863), with 93.3% (n = 780) showing face validity after curation. Down syndrome (n = 302) and neurofibromatosis type 1 (n = 93) were the most frequently reported syndromes, with neurofibromatosis type 1 most common in patients who had central nervous system tumors.
conclusionsDespite limitations and the need for manual curation, FH and GS data collected by using proposed questions were sufficient to identify known heritable cancer patterns. These findings support questionnaire-based data collection and highlight areas for improvement.
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.