Tag Archives: swedish

Patients’ perceptions and practices of informing relatives: a qualitative study within a randomised trial on healthcare … – Nature.com

Posted on by

Prince AE, Cadigan RJ, Henderson GE, Evans JP, Adams M, Coker-Schwimmer E. et al. Is there evidence that we should screen the general population for Lynch syndrome with genetic testing? A systematic review. Pharmacogenomics Pers Med.2017;10:4960.

CAS Google Scholar

Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Haney E, Holmes R. Risk Assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: updated evidence report and systematic review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama. 2019;322:66685.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Monahan KJ, Bradshaw N, Dolwani S, Desouza B, Dunlop MG, East JE, et al. Guidelines for the management of hereditary colorectal cancer from the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)/Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI)/United Kingdom Cancer Genetics Group (UKCGG). Gut. 2020;69:41144.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Young AL, Imran A, Spoelma MJ, Williams R, Tucker KM, Halliday J, et al. Proband-mediated interventions to increase disclosure of genetic risk in families with a BRCA or Lynch syndrome condition: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet. 2023;31:1834.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Ahsan MD, Levi SR, Webster EM, Bergeron H, Lin J, Narayan P, et al. Do people with hereditary cancer syndromes inform their at-risk relatives? A systematic review and meta-analysis. PEC Innov. 2023;2:100138.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Gaff CL, Collins V, Symes T, Halliday J. Facilitating family communication about predictive genetic testing: probands perceptions. J Genet Couns. 2005;14:13340.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Frey MK, Ahsan MD, Bergeron H, Lin J, Li X, Fowlkes RK, et al. Cascade testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: should we move toward direct relative contact? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40:412943.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Menko FH, van der Velden SL, Griffioen DN, Ait Moha D, Jeanson KN, Hogervorst FBL, et al. Does a proactive procedure lead to a higher uptake of predictive testing in families with a pathogenic BRCA1/BRCA2 variant? A family cancer clinic evaluation. J Genet Couns. 2023 [Internet]. Aug 21. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37605508.

National clinical guidelines of breast cancer management [Internet]. Confederation of Regional Cancer Centres in Sweden. [cited 2023 Sept 10]. Available from: https://kunskapsbanken.cancercentrum.se/diagnoser/brostcancer/vardprogram/.

National clinical guidelines of colorectal cancer management [Internet]. Confederation of Regional Cancer Centres in Sweden. [cited 2023 Sept 10]. Available from: https://kunskapsbanken.cancercentrum.se/diagnoser/tjock-och-andtarmscancer/vardprogram/.

Hawranek C, Ehrencrona H, Ofverholm A, Hellquist BN, Rosen A. Direct letters to relatives at risk of hereditary cancer-study protocol for a multi-center randomized controlled trial of healthcare-assisted versus family-mediated risk disclosure at Swedish cancer genetics clinics (DIRECT-study). Trials. 2023;24:810.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport, Exerc Health. 2019;11:58997.

Article Google Scholar

Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77101.

Article Google Scholar

Forrest K, Simpson SA, Wilson BJ, van Teijlingen ER, McKee L, Haites N, et al. To tell or not to tell: barriers and facilitators in family communication about genetic risk. Clin Genet. 2003;64:31726.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Gaff CL, Clarke AJ, Atkinson P, Sivell S, Elwyn G, Iredale R, et al. Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet. 2007;15:9991011.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

McGarragle KM, Hare C, Holter S, Facey DA, McShane K, Gallinger S, et al. Examining intrafamilial communication of colorectal cancer risk status to family members and kin responses to colonoscopy: a qualitative study. Hered Cancer Clin Pr. 2019;17:16.

Article Google Scholar

Henrikson NB, Blasi P, Figueroa Gray M, Tiffany BT, Scrol A, Ralston JD, et al. Patient and family preferences on health system-led direct contact for cascade screening. J Pers Med. 2021;11:538.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Pedrazzani C, Aceti M, Schweighoffer R, Kaiser-Grolimund A, Brki N, Chappuis PO, et al. The communication chain of genetic risk: analyses of narrative data exploring probandprovider and probandfamily communication in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Pers Med. 2022;12:1249.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Srinivasan S, Won NY, Dotson WD, Wright ST, Roberts MC. Barriers and facilitators for cascade testing in genetic conditions: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet. 2020;28:163144.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Daly MB. Family communication of genetic risk: a personalized approach. Curr Genet Med Rep. 2016;4:3540.

Article Google Scholar

Finn KS, Pacyna J, Azevedo Tsou C, Jewel Samadder N, Sharp R. Patient-reported anticipated barriers and benefits to sharing cancer genetic risk information with family members. Eur J Hum Genet. 2022;30:5361.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Srinivasan S, Hampel H, Leeman J, Patel A, Kulchak Rahm A, Reuland DS, et al. Stakeholder perspectives on overcoming barriers to cascade testing in Lynch syndrome: a qualitative study. Cancer Prev Res. 2020;13:103746.

Article Google Scholar

Ballard LM, Band R, Lucassen AM. Interventions to support patients with sharing genetic test results with at-risk relatives: a synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM). Eur J Hum Genet. 2023;31:9881002.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mendes A, Paneque M, Sousa L, Clarke A, Sequeiros J. How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counselling: a systematic review of research evidence. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24:31525.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Vos J, Menko F, Jansen AM, van Asperen CJ, Stiggelbout AM, Tibben A. A whisper-game perspective on the family communication of DNA-test results: a retrospective study on the communication process of BRCA1/2-test results between proband and relatives. Fam Cancer. 2011;10:8796.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Jacobs C, Dancyger C, Smith JA, Michie S. Accuracy of recall of information about a cancer-predisposing BRCA1/2 gene mutation among patients and relatives. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015;23:14751.

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

van den Heuvel LM, Hoedemaekers YM, Baas AF, Baars MJH, van Tintelen JP, Smets EMA, et al. A tailored approach to informing relatives at risk of inherited cardiac conditions: results of a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Hum Genet. 2022;30:20310.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Jacobs C, Patch C, Michie S. Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review. Eur J Hum Genet. 2019;27:51124.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

van den Heuvel LM, Smets EMA, van Tintelen JP, Christiaans I. How to inform relatives at risk of hereditary diseases? A mixed-methods systematic review on patient attitudes. J Genet Couns. 2019;28:104258.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Eijzenga W, de Geus E, Aalfs CM, Menko FH, Sijmons RH, de Haes H, et al. How to support cancer genetics counselees in informing at-risk relatives? Lessons from a randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101:16119.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Pedrazzani C, Ming C, Burki N, Caiata-Zufferey M, Chappuis PO, Duquette D, et al. Genetic literacy and communication of genetic information in families concerned with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a cross-study comparison in two countries and within a timeframe of more than 10 years. Cancers. 2021;13:6254.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Paul J, Metcalfe S, Stirling L, Wilson B, Hodgson J. Analyzing communication in genetic consultations-a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2015;98:1533.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Henrikson NB, Blasi PR, Fullerton SM, Grafton J, Leppig KA, Jarvik GP, et al. It would be so much easier: health system-led genetic risk notification-feasibility and acceptability of cascade screening in an integrated system. J Community Genet. 2019;10:46170.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Dheensa S, Fenwick A, Lucassen A. Is this knowledge mine and nobody elses? I dont feel that. Patient views about consent, confidentiality and information-sharing in genetic medicine. J Med Eth. 2016;42:1749.

Article Google Scholar

Tam NT, Huy NT, Thoa le TB, Long NP, Trang NT, Hirayama K, et al. Participants understanding of informed consent in clinical trials over three decades: systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2015;93:18698H.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Blasi PR, Scrol A, Anderson ML, Gray MF, Tiffany B, Fullerton SM, et al. Feasibility, acceptability, and limited efficacy of health system-led familial risk notification: protocol for a mixed-methods evaluation. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2022;8:174.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kim S, Aceti M, Baroutsou V, Burki N, Caiata-Zufferey M, Cattaneo M, et al. Using a Tailored Digital Health Intervention for family communication and cascade genetic testing in Swiss and Korean families with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: protocol for the DIALOGUE study. JMIR Res Protoc. 2021;10:e26264.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Siglen E, Vetti HH, Augestad M, Steen VM, Lunde A, Bjorvatn C. Evaluation of the Rosa chatbot providing genetic information to patients at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: qualitative interview study. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e46571.

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Read more from the original source:

Patients' perceptions and practices of informing relatives: a qualitative study within a randomised trial on healthcare ... - Nature.com

Sweden seeks to tighten NATO’s grip in Baltic Sea with 2 new submarines – POLITICO Europe

Posted on by

Press play to listen to this article

Voiced by artificial intelligence.

KARLSKRONA, Sweden Theyve been on the drawing board for more than a decade, but in the heart of a vast assembly hall in a shipyard on the Baltic Sea coast, Swedens two new A26 attack submarinesare finally coming together.

Set for launch in 2027 and 2028, the 66-meter-long diesel-electric subs, named Blekinge and Skne after two Swedish counties, are designed to patrol NATOs eastern reaches under the Baltic Sea, tracking and countering Moscows maritime moves amid ever worsening relations between Russia and Europe.

The two are Swedens first new subs to be built since the mid-1990s and will join four older vessels in the Nordic states fleet.

We have a long history of building submarines, said Mats Wicksell, the head of Kockums, a business area of Swedish military equipment manufacturer Saab which is building the A26s. But this is still a big step forward for us.

The looming Swedish launches underscore a nascent subsea renewal in Northern Europe, where the Norwegian navy recently ordered four new submarines from Germanys ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS). The Netherlands has received bids from TKMS, Saab Kockums and Frances Naval Group to build four submarines, while Denmark, which disposed of its fleet in 2004, recently suggested itmightreverse that move.

This expansion will partially bridge the gap to NATOs biggest European fleets, which are set for slight growth this decade, according to a report by Swedens Defense Research Agency. Six new French Barracuda class submarines are entering service and two further Type 212 subs will join an existing German fleet of six. The U.K.s fleet of Astute class submarines will total seven by the end of the decade and the Italian Todaro class submarines eight.

The European upgrades come amid a Russian PR drive about additions to its own fleet. In December, President Vladimir Putin posed on the dockside at Russias White Sea submarine production hub at Severodvinsk alongside two new vessels, the Krasnoyarsk and Emperor Alexander the Third.

The Russian navy will have 50 submarines in 2030, according to the Swedish report.

The U.S. submarine fleet is set to shrink slightly in numerical terms to 57 by 2030, but the continued introduction of the new Virginia class will serve to maintain and even widen America's technological advantage over its rivals during the same period, the Swedish report said.

Visited on a recent weekday, the Saab shipyard in the southern Swedish naval town of Karlskrona was humming with activity.

The partially built Blekinge was shrouded in scaffolding, while metal workers prepared further steel hull sections for highly skilled welders to later stitch together into a whole capable of withstanding blasts from mines and impact with the seabed. In another area, electricians threaded seemingly endless reams of wiring into high-tech interiors.

For Sweden, the long delayed new submarines they were initially supposed to enter service in 2018 and 2019 will be a shot in the arm in a rapidly deteriorating security environment.

Sweden has seenincursionsby an unidentified submarine in its territorial waters as well as explosions crippling the Russian-built Nord Stream natural gas pipelines in its maritime exclusive economic zone in 2022 and the severing of a subsea communications cable linkto Estoniain 2023.

Sweden reinstated conscription and remilitarized its strategically placed Baltic Sea of Gotland in the wake of Russias annexation of Crimea in 2014. Since the Kremlins full scale attack on Ukraine in 2022, it has boosted defense spending by 30 percent between 2023 and 2024 and applied to join NATO.

In early January, the Swedish government and the head of its armytoldcitizens to prepare themselves for war.

Theplan tolaunch the A26s has been a key pillar in Stockholms claim that it cancontributeto NATOs military strength,and isnt applying to join the alliance solely to benefit from its mutual defense guarantees.

Since the accession to NATO of the Baltic States in 2004 and Finland last April, the alliance has faced a headache over how to protect maritime supply lines to those states and restrict access to Russia in the event of conflict with the Kremlin.

Carl Gyhlenius, a Swedish former submarine commander and now a planner for the countrys navy, said he felt that NATO was getting a missing jigsaw piece with Sweden's NATO accession delayed by foot-dragging from Turkey and Hungary.

The Baltic Sea is hard to deal with if you don't have the necessary experience, and the fact that another country is joining NATO which has this as its backyard, with that regional expertise, that should ease operational problems, Gyhlenius said.

The Baltic is widely seen as a tricky operating environment because its varying salt levels affect sonar. It is also shallow and heavily trafficked, which increases collision risk.

On a recent visit to Stockholm, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg praised Swedens defense industry saying it offered advanced technology across a range of branches addingthat the NATO accession of the Nordic statewill be a big advantagefor the alliance as it seeks to maintainits technological edgeoveritsrivals.

Swedens first submarine, called the Shark, was launched in 1904, and over the decades that followed the Swedish navyexpanded its underwater capabilities as part of its broader effort to mount a credible national defense as a neutral state betweenEast andWest.

Toward the end of the last century,Swedish engineers achieved a technical breakthrough with a system called air independent propulsion (AIP) which allowed Swedish submarines to operate for longer periods without surfacing, aiding their ability to evade detection.

Following the end of the Cold War, Sweden cut back on defense spending and its submarine program was largely on hold foradecade until 2010, when Defense Minister Sten Tolgfors announced a plan to build the A26.

Through this significant renewal, we are ensuring that the Swedish submarine fleet will continue to maintain the highest international class, he said. Modern submarines represent a significant obstacle to any actor who wants to use the Baltic Sea for anything other than peaceful shipping.

In the years since, the A26 project has been criticized for delays and cost overruns.

But its defenders say the wait and extra cost will be justified by the delivery of vessels tailor-made for Baltic Sea conditions at a time when control of that waterway is geopolitically vital.

In its promotional material, Saab notes that the dimensions of the A26 as well as its updated AIP system and new sonar-defeating hull design make it ideally suited to the Baltic.

It also has a new modular design, which will allow obsolete technology to be replaced with new systems more easily and a new portal toward the front of the boat will also allow easier interaction between the crew inside the vessel and divers or unmanned vessels operating outside, Saab says.

Kockums chief Wicksell said the A26 represents value for money because its combination of stealth and advanced weapons systems can help ward off foes and reduce the risk of a costly future conflict.

If I know there is something out there but I dont know where it is and I cant defend myself against it, that is a deterrent, he said.

Read more from the original source:

Sweden seeks to tighten NATO's grip in Baltic Sea with 2 new submarines - POLITICO Europe