ArticlePloS one2010
A survey of UK public interest in internet-based personal genome testing.
Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
57 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Pooled it
- Predictors of genetic testing decisions: a systematic review and critique of the literature.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Pooled it
- Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2012Pooled it
- The survey of public perception and general knowledge of genomic research and medicine in Japan conducted by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development.Journal of human genetics · 2019Trial
- Interest and informational preferences regarding genomic testing for modest increases in colorectal cancer risk.Public health genomics · 2014Trial
- Disclosure of genetic information and change in dietary intake: a randomized controlled trial.PloS one · 2014Trial
- Acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of six common types of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- BioSTEM: A modern educational tool for research and innovation in the field of molecular biology and personalized medicine.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Changes in acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands from 2017 to 2022.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward genetic testing in breast cancer patients in China.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Diversity of thought: public perceptions of genetic testing across ethnic groups in the UK.Journal of human genetics · 2024Article
- Review
- Are there differences in perceptions, preferences and attitudes towards disclosure of genetic testing for Stroke? A qualitative study among stroke-free SIREN-SIBS genomics study participants.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2023Article
- Attitudes towards genetic testing: The role of genetic literacy, motivated cognition, and socio-demographic characteristics.PloS one · 2023Article
- Psychological Determinants of Men's Adherence to Cascade Screening forCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- "I think that a brief conversation from their provider can go a very long way": Patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators of genetic testing after ovarian cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- May direct-to-consumer genetic testing have an impact on general practitioners' daily practice? a cross-sectional study of patients' intentions towards this approach.BMC family practice · 2021Article
- Consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary.Genes & nutrition · 2021Article
- Predictors of stakeholders' intention to adopt nutrigenomics.Genes & nutrition · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn view of the increasing availability of commercial internet-based Personal Genome Testing (PGT), this study aimed to explore the reasons why people would consider taking such a test and how they would use the genetic risk information provided. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsA self-completion questionnaire assessing public awareness and interest in PGT and motivational reasons for undergoing PGT was completed by 4,050 unselected adult volunteers from the UK-based TwinsUK register, aged 17 to 91 (response rate 62%). Only 13% of respondents were aware of the existence of PGT. After reading a brief summary about PGT, one in twenty participants (5%) were potentially interested at current prices (£250), however this proportion rose to half (50%) if the test was free of charge. Nearly all respondents who were interested in free PGT reported they would take the test to encourage them to adopt a healthier lifestyle if found to be at high genetic risk of a disease (93%). Around 4 in 5 respondents would have the test to convey genetic risk information to their children and a similar proportion felt that having a PGT would enable their doctor to monitor their health more closely. A TwinsUK research focus group also indicated that consumers would consult their GP to help interpret results of PGT. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This hypothetical study suggests that increasing publicity and decreasing costs of PGT may lead to increased uptake, driven in part by the general public's desire to monitor and improve their health. Although the future extent of the clinical utility of PGT is currently unknown, it is crucial that consumers are well informed about the current limitations of PGT. Our results suggest that health professionals will inevitably be required to respond to individuals who have undergone PGT. This has implications for health service providers regarding both cost and time.
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.