Trial reportTrials2012
Examining the impact of genetic testing for type 2 diabetes on health behaviors: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Trials, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01060540 (The Impact of Genetic Testing for Type 2 Diabetes on Health Behaviors), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 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.
The Impact of Genetic Testing for Type 2 Diabetes on Health Behaviors
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Facing Visualizations of Personal Health Data.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Pooled it
- The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2016Pooled it
- Does Type 2 Diabetes Genetic Testing and Counseling Reduce Modifiable Risk Factors? A Randomized Controlled Trial of Veterans.Journal of general internal medicine · 2015Trial
- Genomic-based tools for the risk assessment, management, and prevention of type 2 diabetes.The application of clinical genetics · 2015Review
- Susceptibility to type 2 diabetes mellitus--from genes to prevention.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2014Review
- Health coaching and genomics-potential avenues to elicit behavior change in those at risk for chronic disease: protocol for personalized medicine effectiveness study in air force primary care.Global advances in health and medicine · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe describe the study design, procedures, and development of the risk counseling protocol used in a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of genetic testing for diabetes mellitus (DM) on psychological, health behavior, and clinical outcomes. METHODS/
designEligible patients are aged 21 to 65 years with body mass index (BMI) ≥27 kg/m(2) and no prior diagnosis of DM. At baseline, conventional DM risk factors are assessed, and blood is drawn for possible genetic testing. Participants are randomized to receive conventional risk counseling for DM with eye disease counseling or with genetic test results. The counseling protocol was pilot tested to identify an acceptable graphical format for conveying risk estimates and match the length of the eye disease to genetic counseling. Risk estimates are presented with a vertical bar graph denoting risk level with colors and descriptors. After receiving either genetic counseling regarding risk for DM or control counseling on eye disease, brief lifestyle counseling for prevention of DM is provided to all participants. DISCUSSION: A standardized risk counseling protocol is being used in a randomized trial of 600 participants. Results of this trial will inform policy about whether risk counseling should include genetic counseling.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01060540.
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.