ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2009
Closing the gap: inverting the genetics curriculum to ensure an informed public.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comparison of genome cohort participants' genetic knowledge and preferences to receive genetic results before and after a genetics workshop.Journal of human genetics · 2018Trial
- Is Tori seeing red? A lesson for first-year biology that unveils the complexity of phenotypic variation with pedigree analysis.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2026Article
- Developing and Teaching Curriculum to Reduce Genetic Essentialism in University Classrooms.Behavior genetics · 2026Article
- Impediments to countering racist pseudoscience.Evolutionary human sciences · 2025Article
- A 30-nation investigation of lay heritability beliefs.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2024Article
- Challenging Misconceptions about Race in Undergraduate Genetics.CBE life sciences education · 2024Article
- Development and Evaluation of Integrated Diabetes Curricula for Teaching Gene by Environment Concepts to High School Health and Biology Students.Journal of STEM outreach · 2024Article
- Getting it right: Teaching undergraduate biology to undermine racial essentialism.Biology methods & protocols · 2023Article
- Mendelian or Multifactorial? Current Undergraduate Genetics Assessments Focus on Genes and Rarely Include the Environment.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2022Article
- Ending genetic essentialism through genetics education.HGG advances · 2022Review
- Punnett Squares or Protein Production? The Expert-Novice Divide for Conceptions of Genes and Gene Expression.CBE life sciences education · 2021Article
- The role of genetic essentialism and genetics knowledge in support for eugenics and genetically modified foods.PloS one · 2021Article
- Teenagers and Precision Psychiatry: A Window of Opportunity.Public health genomics · 2021Article
- Children's beliefs about causes of human characteristics: Genes, environment, or choice?Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2020Article
- Students' Understanding of the Dynamic Nature of Genetics: Characterizing Undergraduates' Explanations for Interaction between Genetics and Environment.CBE life sciences education · 2020Article
- Signaling Inclusivity in Undergraduate Biology Courses through Deliberate Framing of Genetics Topics Relevant to Gender Identity, Disability, and Race.CBE life sciences education · 2020Article
- Using Culturally Relevant Pedagogy to Reconsider the Genetics Canon.Journal of microbiology & biology education · 2020Article
- Increasing genomic literacy among adolescents.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Article
- The Learning Loss Effect in Genetics: What Ideas Do Students Retain or Lose after Instruction?CBE life sciences education · 2018Article
- A Genomically Informed Education System? Challenges for Behavioral Genetics.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past 20 years, the focus of national efforts to improve K-12 science education has ranged from curriculum and professional development of teachers to the adoption of science standards and high-stakes testing. In spite of this work, students in the United States continue to lag behind their peers in other countries. This underperformance is true for genetics, as well as for science and math in general, and is particularly worrisome given the accelerating need for scientists and engineers in our increasingly technology-driven economy. A scientifically literate public is essential if citizens are to engage effectively with policymakers on issues of scientific importance. Perhaps nowhere is this conjunction more personally meaningful than in human genetics and medicine. Rapid changes in our field have the potential to revolutionize healthcare, but the public is ill prepared to participate in this transformation. One potential solution is to modernize the genetics curriculum so that it matches the science of the 21(st) century. This paper highlights changes in human genetics that support a curricular reorganization, outlines the problems with current genetics instruction, and proposes a new genetics curriculum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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 OpenQuestion graph.