ArticleNew genetics and society2010
Personal genomics and individual identities: motivations and moral imperatives of early users.
Article in New genetics and society, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 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
54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Pooled it
- Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2012Pooled it
- Informing the Design of Direct-to-Consumer Interactive Personal Genomics Reports.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Trial
- In Search of Genetic Agency: On the Uses and Actionability of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Results in Biohacking Practices.Sociology of health & illness · 2026Article
- Navigating direct-to-consumer genetic testing: experiences, decisions and perspectives of Dutch users.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Article
- Considerations for developing regulations for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a scoping review using the 3-I framework.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- The expectations and realities of nutrigenomic testing in australia: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2021Article
- Consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary.Genes & nutrition · 2021Article
- The Limits of Empowerment: How to Reframe the Role of mHealth Tools in the Healthcare Ecosystem.Science and engineering ethics · 2020Article
- Observed Family and Friendship Dynamics in Adolescence: a Latent Profile Approach to Identifying "Mesosystem" Adaptation for Intervention Tailoring.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2019Article
- Adolescent and Parental Attitudes About Return of Genomic Research Results: Focus Group Findings Regarding Decisional Preferences.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2018Article
- Article
- "I don't have to know why it snows, I just have to shovel it!": Addiction Recovery, Genetic Frameworks, and Biological Citizenship.BioSocieties · 2017Article
- Adopting genetics: motivations and outcomes of personal genomic testing in adult adoptees.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
- From "Personalized" to "Precision" Medicine: The Ethical and Social Implications of Rhetorical Reform in Genomic Medicine.The Hastings Center report · 2016Article
- Genetic testing and personalized ovarian cancer screening: a survey of public attitudes.BMC women's health · 2016Article
- Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives.BMC medical ethics · 2016Article
- Ethical qualms about genetic prognosis.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2016Article
- Defining Ourselves: Personal Bioinformation as a Tool of Narrative Self-Conception.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since 2007, consumer genomics companies have marketed personal genome scanning services to assess users' genetic predispositions to a variety of complex diseases and traits. This study investigates early users' reasons for utilizing personal genome services, their evaluation of the technology, how they interpret the results, and how they incorporate the results into health-related decision-making. The analysis contextualizes early users' relationships to the technology, the knowledge generated by it, and how it mediates their relationship to their own health and to biomedicine more broadly. The results reveal that early users approach personal genome scanning with both optimism for genomic research and scepticism about the technology's current capabilities, which runs contrary to concerns that consumers may be ill equipped to interpret and understand genome scan results. These findings provide important qualitative insight into early users' conceptualizations of personal genomic risk assessment and illuminate their involvement in configuring this technology in the making.
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.