Is it Feasible?: Self-Affirmation for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Genetic Counseling

Intention to have genetic testing was measured with a single survey item, "Do you plan to have genetic testing?" with response options of yes=1; maybe=2; no=3

Intention to talk with family was measured with a single categorical survey item, "Which best describes your plans to talk with your family members about genetic testing results (check the one answer that is most true for you)?"

Likelihood of talking with family members was measured with a single survey item on a 7 point scale, "How likely are you to share results with the relatives you selected?" with 1= Extremely unlikely; 7=Extremely likely

Decision Self-efficacy was measured with the 12 item Decision Self-efficacy Scale by O'Connor, 1995. Scores ranged from 1-5 with higher average scores indicating higher decision self-efficacy

Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) Knowledge was measured with an adapted 7-question scale based on the National Center for Human Genome Research Knowledge (NCHGRK) Scale [Scherr et al. 2015; Kaphingst et al. 2012]. All questions in the scale were presented as True/False. Each question in the scale had a correct answer (coded as 1) and incorrect answer (coded as 0). This adapted HBOC Knowledge Scale score was calculated by summing the total value across the seven questions, with a range of 0 (minimum score, all incorrect) to 7 (maximum score, all correct). Higher score indicates higher knowledge.

Patient empowerment (client completed) was measured with the 24 item Genetic Counseling Outcomes Scale (GCOS-24; McAllister et al, 2011) using 7-point score ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree. Higher scores indicate higher empowerment.

Patient empowerment (genetic counselor completed) was measured with the 24 item Genetic Counseling Outcomes Scale (GCOS-24; McAllister et al, 2011) using 7-point score ranging from 1=strongly disagree to 7= strongly agree. Higher scores indicate higher empowerment

Mammogram intention was measured with a single survey item on a 7 point scale "How likely are you to get regular mammograms?" with 1= Extremely unlikely to 7=Extremely likely

Patient anxiety was measured using the 6 item short version of the Spielberger State Anxiety Scale, a 4-point scale; 1= not at all, 2=somewhat, 3=moderately, 4= very much. Higher score indicates higher anxiety

Perceived effect of writing exercise on genetic counseling visit was measured using a single item "The values writing activity affected my appointment"; 1=yes; 2=no

Perception that writing exercise hindered the genetic counseling visit was measured using a single survey item "The values writing activity hindered my interaction with my genetic counselor"; 1=yes; 2=no

Perception that intervention improved the genetic counseling visit was measured using a single survey item "The values writing activity improved my interaction with my genetic counselor"; 1=yes; 2=no

Number of words in writing intervention was measured by counting the number of words in the essay written by the client

Number of Words in Writing Intervention Discussing Importance of Selected Value was measured by counting the number of words in the essay written by the client that were in phrases that were focused on discussing the importance of the selected value, as coded by two coders.

Number of Words in Writing Intervention Discussing How Value Was Recently Used was measured by counting the number of words in the essay written by the client that were in phrases that were focused on discussing how the value was recently used.

Number of Examples of How Value was Recently Used was measured by counting the number of unique examples offered in the essay as coded by two coders.

Essay Attitude Strength is a measure of the extent to which the participant's essay demonstrated the importance of the value selected during the writing exercise. Two independent raters read a subset of the essays and used a scoring system based on the procedure described in Harris & Napper (2005). Each rater gave the participant's essay a numeric score between 1 and 7, and the two scores were examined for inter-rater reliability. The primary rater then rated the remaining essays and the final score was the rating assigned by the primary rater for all essays. A score of 1 (minimum) indicated that the selected value appeared to be not at all important to the participant. A score of 7 (maximum) indicated that the selected value appeared to be very important to the participant.

Self-affirmation score is a measure of the extent to which the essay appeared to be self-affirming for the participant. Two independent raters scored a subset of essays using a system based on procedures described in Harris & Napper (2005) and Ferrer et al. (2017) using the following instructions: "Setting aside your own opinions and values, how self-affirmed would you estimate the writer of this passage to have been (at the end)?" Raters scored each essay and the two scores were examined for inter-rater reliability. The primary rater then rated the remaining essays and the final score was the rating assigned by the primary rater for all essays. A score of 1 (minimum) indicated the value was important but did not include descriptions of why the value was important to the participant. A control group participant received a score of 1 if they followed the writing activity's instructions exactly. A score of 5 (maximum) indicated that the essay elaborated on why the value was important.