Assessment of comparative harms/safety should occur according to the hierarchy presented for each of the research questions, with the proviso that this assessment occurs within the context of the topic being assessed.
The strength of consensus for each topic was assessed.
Counselee and counsellor verbal communications were analysed and initiative to discuss 11 genetics-specific conversational topics was assessed.
At the same time, the GPs' opinions of the same topics were assessed (every GP were answering questions about each of his own patients).
In 16 visits two of the lifestyle topics were assessed.
Complementary, the patients' needs for personal information on particular topics of the first part or additional topics were assessed by asking the patients if they wanted more detailed information of certain topics.
Knowledge for each topic area was assessed on a scale of 0 100 based on the percentage of correct questions answered.
Most of the visits in which the patients' lifestyle was assessed, regarded only one of the four lifestyle topics.
Coders first assessed whether the topic was discussed in the visit based on the videotapes.
