ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2012
Genetic counseling, activism and 'genotype-first' diagnosis of developmental disorders.
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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disability, Genetic Counseling, and Medical Education: From Eugenics to Anti-Ableism.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2025Review
- Prognostic imagination: Genetic counseling amidst therapeutic innovation and evolving futures.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Article
- Managing Prognosis in Precision Medicine: Utility, Imagination, and Communication.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Understanding the Psychosocial Effects of WES Test Results on Parents of Children with Rare Diseases.Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- Emerging Genetic Counselor Roles within the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries: as Industry Interest Grows in Rare Genetic Disorders, How are Genetic Counselors Joining the Discussion?Journal of genetic counseling · 2016Article
- A qualitative study of healthcare providers' perspectives on the implications of genome-wide testing in pediatric clinical practice.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
22820968What 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.