Trial reportMayo Clinic proceedings2011
Impact of direct-to-consumer predictive genomic testing on risk perception and worry among patients receiving routine care in a preventive health clinic.
Trial report in Mayo Clinic proceedings, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Pooled it
- Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Trial
- Pharmacogenomics and risk stratification in cardiovascular care: Insights from randomized controlled trials.Medicine · 2025Review
- Advancing the communication of genetic risk for cardiometabolic diseases: a critical interpretive synthesis.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- A qualitative study exploring the consumer experience of receiving self-initiated polygenic risk scores from a third-party website.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
- Behavioural changes, sharing behaviour and psychological responses after receiving direct-to-consumer genetic test results: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of community genetics · 2018Review
- Utilization of Genetic Counseling after Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Consumer Perspectives on Access to Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Role of Demographic Factors and the Testing Experience.The Milbank quarterly · 2017Article
- Does a medical history of hypertension influence disclosing genetic testing results of the risk for salt-sensitive hypertension, in primary care?International journal of general medicine · 2016Article
- Influence of individual differences in disease perception on consumer response to direct-to-consumer genomic testing.Clinical genetics · 2015Article
- Teaching genomic counseling: preparing the genetic counseling workforce for the genomic era.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
- Design and implementation of a randomized controlled trial of genomic counseling for patients with chronic disease.Journal of personalized medicine · 2014Article
- Design, methods, and participant characteristics of the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study, a prospective cohort study of direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing customers.Genome medicine · 2014Article
- Primary care patient willingness for genetic testing for salt-sensitive hypertension: a cross sectional study.BMC family practice · 2013Article
- Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing and Personal Genomics Services: A Review of Recent Empirical Studies.Current genetic medicine reports · 2013Article
- Article
- State of play in direct-to-consumer genetic testing for lifestyle-related diseases: market, marketing content, user experiences and regulation.The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society · 2013Article
- Harm, hype and evidence: ELSI research and policy guidance.Genome medicine · 2013Article
- Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2013Review
- Patients' understanding of and responses to multiplex genetic susceptibility test results.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the impact of direct-to-consumer (DTC) predictive genomic risk information on perceived risk and worry in the context of routine clinical care. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients attending a preventive medicine clinic between June 1 and December 18, 2009, were randomly assigned to receive either genomic risk information from a DTC product plus usual care (n=74) or usual care alone (n=76). At intervals of 1 week and 1 year after their clinic visit, participants completed surveys containing validated measures of risk perception and levels of worry associated with the 12 conditions assessed by the DTC product.
resultsOf 345 patients approached, 150 (43%) agreed to participate, 64 (19%) refused, and 131 (38%) did not respond. Compared with those receiving usual care, participants who received genomic risk information initially rated their risk as higher for 4 conditions (abdominal aneurysm [P=.001], Graves disease [P=.04], obesity [P=.01], and osteoarthritis [P=.04]) and lower for one (prostate cancer [P=.02]). Although differences were not significant, they also reported higher levels of worry for 7 conditions and lower levels for 5 others. At 1 year, there were no significant differences between groups.
conclusionPredictive genomic risk information modestly influences risk perception and worry. The extent and direction of this influence may depend on the condition being tested and its baseline prominence in preventive health care and may attenuate with 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.