ReviewHuman molecular genetics2011
Direct-to-consumer personalized genomic testing.
Review in Human molecular genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Primary care providers' cancer genetic testing-related knowledge, attitudes, and communication behaviors: A systematic review and research agenda.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Genomic Counseling for Patients Receiving Personalized and Actionable Complex Disease Reports.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Trial
- Trial
- A randomized controlled trial of analogue pharmacogenomic testing feedback for psychotropic medications.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- The Clinical Laboratory Is an Integral Component to Health Care Delivery : An Expanded Representation of the Total Testing Process.American journal of clinical pathology · 2023Article
- Integrating Rules for Genomic Research, Clinical Care, Public Health Screening and DTC Testing: Creating Translational Law for Translational Genomics.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2020Article
- Consistency of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Results Among Identical Twins.The American journal of medicine · 2020Article
- A New Era, New Strategies: Education and Communication Strategies to Manage Greater Access to Genomic Information.The Hastings Center report · 2018Article
- Sequencing Newborns: A Call for Nuanced Use of Genomic Technologies.The Hastings Center report · 2018Article
- Effectiveness of personal genomic testing for disease-prevention behavior when combined with careful consultation with a physician: a preliminary study.BMC research notes · 2018Article
- Implementation of personalized medicine in Central-Eastern Europe: pitfalls and potentials based on citizen's attitude.The EPMA journal · 2018Article
- Article
- Utilization of Genetic Counseling after Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Article
- Genetic risk models: Influence of model size on risk estimates and precision.Genetic epidemiology · 2017Article
- Personal Genomic Testing for Cancer Risk: Results From the Impact of Personal Genomics Study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2017Article
- Germline genetic profiling in prostate cancer: latest developments and potential clinical applications.Future science OA · 2016Review
- Case Report: Direct Access Genetic Testing and A False-Positive Result For Long QT Syndrome.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- The impact ofGenes & nutrition · 2016Article
- Awareness, attitudes and perspectives of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in Greece: a survey of potential consumers.Journal of human genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past 18 months, there have been notable developments in the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genomic testing arena, in particular with regard to issues surrounding governmental regulation in the USA. While commentaries continue to proliferate on this topic, actual empirical research remains relatively scant. In terms of DTC genomic testing for disease susceptibility, most of the research has centered on uptake, perceptions and attitudes toward testing among health care professionals and consumers. Only a few available studies have examined actual behavioral response among consumers, and we are not aware of any studies that have examined response to DTC genetic testing for ancestry or for drug response. We propose that further research in this area is desperately needed, despite challenges in designing appropriate studies given the rapid pace at which the field is evolving. Ultimately, DTC genomic testing for common markers and conditions is only a precursor to the eventual cost-effectiveness and wide availability of whole genome sequencing of individuals, although it remains unclear whether DTC genomic information will still be attainable. Either way, however, current knowledge needs to be extended and enhanced with respect to the delivery, impact and use of increasingly accurate and comprehensive individualized genomic data.
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.