Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42868120›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2026

Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings.

Deloris J Veney, Lai Wei, Jaden Miller, Amanda E Toland, Carolyn J Presley, Heather Hampel, Tasleem J Padamsee, Michael J Bishop, James J Kim, Shelly R Hovick and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05215769 (Video Intervention to Address Pre-Test Patient Education for Tumor Genomic Testing), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT05215769 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Video Intervention to Address Pre-Test Patient Education for Tumor Genomic Testing

TypeinterventionalSponsorOhio State University Comprehensive Cancer CenterRan2022 to 2026Enrolled243ConditionsAnatomic Stage IV Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Metastatic Breast Carcinoma, Metastatic Lung Carcinoma, Metastatic Malignant Solid NeoplasmArmsHealth Education, Questionnaire Administration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Deloris J VeneyDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Lai WeiDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Jaden MillerDivision of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Amanda E TolandDivision of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Carolyn J PresleyDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2607-5639
Heather HampelDivision of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7558-9794
Tasleem J PadamseeDivision of Health Services Management and Policy, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6644-8084
Michael J BishopBon Secours-Mercy Health Lima, Lima, Ohio, United States of America.
James J KimBon Secours-Mercy Health St. Elizabeth, Youngstown, Ohio, United States of America.
Shelly R HovickSchool of Communication, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
William J IrvinBon Secours Cancer Institute at St. Francis, Richmond, Virginia, United States of America.
Leigha SenterDivision of Human Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Daniel G StoverDivision of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9003-8165

Funding

Translational Therapeutics Research Program (TT)P30CA016058 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer A. Woyach · 1985 to 2026
$132.3M
Impact of germline variants on racial and ethnic differences in somatic mutation frequencyR01CA215151 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI TOLAND, AMANDA EWART · 2018 to 2022
$1.8M
Resiliency among Older Adults Receiving Lung Cancer Treatment: A Supportive Care Intervention StudyK76AG074923 · NIA · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PRESLEY, CAROLYN · 2021 to 2025
$1.2M
Video Intervention to Address Pre-Test Patient Education for Tumor Genomic TestingR21CA259985 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SENTER-JAMIESON, LEIGHA, STOVER, DANIEL G. · 2021 to 2021
$396k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016058NCI NIH HHS R01 CA215151NCI NIH HHS R21 CA259985NIA NIH HHS K76 AG074923
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTumor genomic testing (TGT) is standard-of-care for most patients with advanced/metastatic cancer. Despite established guidelines, patient education prior to TGT is frequently omitted. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact and durability of a concise 3-4 minute video for patient education prior to TGT in community versus academic sites and across cancer types. PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients undergoing standard-of-care TGT were enrolled at a tertiary academic institution in three cohorts: Cohort 1-breast cancer; Cohort 2-lung cancer; Cohort 3-other cancers. Cohort 4 consisted of patients with any cancer type similarly undergoing SOC TGT at one of three community cancer centers. Participants completed survey measures prior to video viewing (T1), immediately post-viewing (T2), and after return of TGT results (T3). Outcome measures included: 1) 10-question objective genomic knowledge/understanding (GKU); 2) 10-question video message-specific knowledge (VMSK); 3) 11-question Trust in Physician/Provider (TIPP); 4) perceptions regarding TGT.

resultsA total of 203 participants completed all survey timepoints. Higher baseline GKU and VMSK scores were significantly associated with higher income and greater years of education. For the primary objective, there was a significant and sustained improvement in VMSK from T1:T2:T3 (Poverall p < 0.0001), with no significant change in GKU (p = 0.41) or TIPP (p = 0.73). This trend was consistent within each cohort (all p ≤ 0.0001). Results for four VMSK questions significantly improved, including impact on treatment decisions, incidental germline findings, and insurance coverage of testing.

conclusionsA concise, 3-4 minute, broadly applicable educational video administered prior to TGT significantly and sustainably improved video message-specific knowledge in diverse cancer types and in academic and community settings. This resource is publicly available at http://www.tumor-testing.com, with a goal to efficiently educate and empower patients regarding TGT while addressing guidelines within the flow of clinical practice.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05215769.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingNeoplasmsPatient Education as TopicVideo RecordingAdultAgedFemaleGenomicsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID42868120
PMCPMC13660886

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.