Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15090667›Full record

ArticleOccupational and environmental medicine2004

Quantifying the advantages and disadvantages of pre-placement genetic screening.

K T Palmer, J Poole, R G Rawbone, D Coggon

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Occupational and environmental medicine, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

K T PalmerMRC Environmental Epidemiology Unit, Community Clinical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO16 6YD, UK. ktp@mrc.soton.ac.uk
J Poole
R G Rawbone
D Coggon
University of Southampton · GBHealth and Safety Executive · GBSouthampton General Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTests of genotype may enable workers at unusual risk of future ill-health to be identified. Using them to select for employment, however, entails gains and losses to employers and employees. Ensuring a fair balance between the rights and obligations of each group requires a value judgement, but the advantages and disadvantages to interested parties must first be quantified in a meaningful way. METHOD AND

resultsThe purposes of pre-employment screening are reviewed, and several simple measures relevant to the separate interests of employers and job applicants proposed-number screened to prevent a single adverse outcome; number excluded to prevent a case; expected incidence of the adverse outcome in those excluded; and preventable fraction. The derivation of these measures is illustrated, and the factors that influence them (the prevalence of the prognostic trait, the relative risk that it carries for an adverse outcome, and the overall incidence of disease) are related algebraically and graphically, to aid judgement on the utility of screening under different circumstances.

conclusionsIn sensitive areas such as genetic testing the onus should be on the employer to justify plans for pre-placement screening. Several quantitative measures can be used to inform the ethical and economic debate about screening and to evaluate alternative strategies for prevention.

Indexed as

EmploymentGenetic TestingCost-Benefit AnalysisEthics, MedicalGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansOccupational Health ServicesPersonnel Selection

Identifiers

PMID15090667
PMCPMC1740790
OpenAlexW2156928844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.