ArticleGenetic testing and molecular biomarkers2012
Professional perspectives about pharmacogenetic testing and managing ancillary findings.
Article in Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 59 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding the barriers and enablers of pharmacogenomic testing in primary care: a qualitative systematic review with meta-aggregation synthesis.Pharmacogenomics · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacogenomic and Pharmacogenetic Test-Guided Personalized Therapies: A Systematic Review of the Approved Active Substances for Personalized Medicine in Germany.Advances in therapy · 2016Pooled it
- Assessing the views and opinions of psychiatric patients receiving genome-guided treatment within the scope of the PREPARE preemptive pharmacogenomics clinical study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- A qualitative approach to assess the opinion of physicians about the challenges and prospects of pharmacogenomic testing implementation in clinical practice in Greece.Human genomics · 2024Article
- Pharmacogenomics implementation across multiple clinic settings: a qualitative evaluation.Pharmacogenomics · 2023Article
- Attitudes about pharmacogenomic testing vary by healthcare specialty.Pharmacogenomics · 2023Article
- PGx in psychiatry: Patients' knowledge, interest, and uncertainty management preferences in the context of pharmacogenomic testing.Patient education and counseling · 2021Article
- On the readiness of physicians for pharmacogenomics testing: an empirical assessment.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2018Article
- Prescriber Attitudes Toward Implementation of Pharmacogenomic Testing in a Family Medicine Residency Program.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2018Article
- Great expectations: patient perspectives and anticipated utility of non-diagnostic genomic-sequencing results.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- Healthcare provider education to support integration of pharmacogenomics in practice: the eMERGE Network experience.Pharmacogenomics · 2017Article
- Is "incidental finding" the best term?: a study of patients' preferences.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2017Article
- Article
- Attitudes of clinicians following large-scale pharmacogenomics implementation.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2016Article
- Acceptability of, and Information Needs Regarding, Next-Generation Sequencing in People Tested for Hereditary Cancer: A Qualitative Study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- A Systematic Review of the Management of Incidental Findings in Genomic Research.BEOnline : journal of the West African bioethics training program · 2016Article
- Pharmacogenomics in diverse practice settings: implementation beyond major metropolitan areas.Pharmacogenomics · 2015Article
- Understanding patient and provider perceptions and expectations of genomic medicine.Journal of surgical oncology · 2015Review
- Pragmatic and Ethical Challenges of Incorporating the Genome into the Electronic Medical Record.Current genetic medicine reports · 2014Article
- Striking a balance in communicating pharmacogenetic test results: promoting comprehension and minimizing adverse psychological and behavioral response.Patient education and counseling · 2014Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimsPharmacogenetic (PGx) tests, intended to inform therapeutic decision making through prediction of patient likelihood to respond to or experience an adverse effect from a specific treatment, may also generate ancillary, or incidental, disease information unrelated to the purpose for which the test was ordered. To assess attitudes toward PGx testing, ancillary disease risk information, and related clinical issues, we conducted a series of focus groups among health professionals.
resultsTwenty-one primary care and genetics professionals from Durham, NC, were recruited to participate in three focus groups (two of primary care professionals [PCPs] and one of geneticists). Overall, interest in PGx testing was positive, though enthusiasm was reserved among PCPs due to concerns about clinical utility, insurance coverage, delay of treatment, and ability to communicate and interpret ancillary disease risk information. Although many PCPs felt an obligation to disclose information about ancillary disease risk, geneticists did not believe that it was always necessary, noting the complexities of genetic risk results such as incomplete penetrance.
conclusionThis pilot study found that health professionals' interest in the use of PGx testing was limited by concerns about the lack of evidence of clinical utility and their ability to interpret and communicate ancillary disease risk information to patients. Additional educational resources, access to genetic specialists, and clear clinical guidelines about the use of PGx testing would greatly facilitate appropriate use of testing.
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.