Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22820968›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2012

Genetic counseling, activism and 'genotype-first' diagnosis of developmental disorders.

Daniel Navon

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Daniel NavonDepartment of Sociology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA. dn2181@columbia.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper presents a sociological examination of the role of genetic counselors as advocates, not only for patients and their families, but also for genetic conditions themselves. In becoming activists for new disorders, genetic counselors are helping to create new categories that will shape expectations and treatment regimens for both existing patients and those who are yet to be diagnosed. By virtue of their expertise and their position at the intersection of several key professions and constituencies, genetic counselors are likely to play a central role in the way the genetic testing technologies, and especially 'genotype-first' diagnosis, impacts the way we understand and categorize developmental difference. I outline some of the promises and dangers that this kind of activism holds for people with developmental disabilities, and particularly the challenge presented by systemic ascertainment bias in the face of genotype-phenotype uncertainty. I argue that new testing techniques like microarray analysis that do not need to be targeted on the basis of clinical presentation throw these challenges into sharp relief, and that the genetic counseling community should consider how to marry advocacy for new genetic conditions with an emphasis on the indeterminate developmental potential of every child.

Indexed as

Genetic CounselingPatient AdvocacyDevelopmental DisabilitiesHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.