ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2012
Informed choice in direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) websites: a content analysis of benefits, risks, and limitations.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Guideline
- Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2015Pooled it
- Navigating direct-to-consumer genetic testing: experiences, decisions and perspectives of Dutch users.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Intricate interactions between fine-scale genetic structure, lifestyle, and dietary habits in the Japanese population.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Considerations for developing regulations for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a scoping review using the 3-I framework.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- 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
- Information given by websites selling home self-sampling COVID-19 tests: an analysis of accuracy and completeness.BMJ open · 2020Observational
- Cascading After Peridiagnostic Cancer Genetic Testing: An Alternative to Population-Based Screening.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020Article
- WHY WE FEAR GENETIC INFORMANTS: USING GENETIC GENEALOGY TO CATCH SERIAL KILLERS.The Columbia science and technology law review · 2019Article
- A systematic analysis of online marketing materials used by providers of expanded carrier screening.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2018Article
- Sequencing Newborns: A Call for Nuanced Use of Genomic Technologies.The Hastings Center report · 2018Article
- Medicine, market and communication: ethical considerations in regard to persuasive communication in direct-to-consumer genetic testing services.BMC medical ethics · 2018Article
- Readability of informed consent forms for whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- Factors Associated with Acceptability, Consideration and Intention of Uptake of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Survey Study.Public health genomics · 2018Article
- Third party interpretation of raw genetic data: an ethical exploration.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Review
- 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice : The Sixth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of 10 societies and by invited experts).International journal of behavioral medicine · 2017Article
- Ancestry Testing and the Practice of Genetic Counseling.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Review
- Health Orientation, Knowledge, and Attitudes toward Genetic Testing and Personalized Genomic Services: Preliminary Data from an Italian Sample.BioMed research international · 2016Article
- Direct-to-consumer genomics on the scales of autonomy.Journal of medical ethics · 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
An informed choice about health-related direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) requires knowledge of potential benefits, risks, and limitations. To understand the information that potential consumers of DTCGT services are exposed to on company websites, we conducted a content analysis of 23 health-related DTCGT websites. Results revealed that benefit statements outweighed risk and limitation statements 6 to 1. The most frequently described benefits were: 1) disease prevention, 2) consumer education, 3) personalized medical recommendations, and 4) the ability to make health decisions. Thirty-five percent of websites also presented at least one risk of testing. Seventy-eight percent of websites mentioned at least one limitation of testing. Based on this information, potential consumers might get an inaccurate picture of genetic testing which could impact their ability to make an informed decision. Practices that enhance the presentation of balanced information on DTCGT company websites should be encouraged.
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.