ArticleJournal of community genetics2014
The challenge of implementing genetic tests with clinical utility while avoiding unsound applications.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 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
- Are we nearly there yet? Starts and stops on the road to use of polygenic scores.Journal of community genetics · 2023Article
- Implementation and implications for polygenic risk scores in healthcare.Human genomics · 2021Review
- Review
- Opinion: redefining the role of the physician in laboratory medicine in the context of emerging technologies, personalised medicine and patient autonomy ('4P medicine').Journal of clinical pathology · 2019Article
- A Systematic Review of the Psychological Implications of Genetic Testing: A Comparative Analysis Among Cardiovascular, Neurodegenerative and Cancer Diseases.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Review
- Third party interpretation of raw genetic data: an ethical exploration.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Review
- Direct to consumer testing in reproductive contexts--should health professionals be concerned?Life sciences, society and policy · 2015Article
- Predictive genetic testing, risk communication, and risk perception: an international expert meeting in Berlin, Germany.Journal of community genetics · 2014Article
- Psychometric properties of the Pediatric Testing Attitudes Scale-Diabetes (P-TAS-D) for parents of children undergoing predictive risk screening.Pediatric diabetes · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetics and genomics have developed fast in the last decade, but have not revolutionized medicine, as some had expected. While translation of research findings to public health applications is lagging behind, direct-to-consumer (DTC) offers of genetic testing have become available, both for monogenic and severe genetic disorders and for genetic variants possibly associated with common complex diseases (susceptibility variants). The European Society of Human Genetics is concerned about the way in which commercial companies are currently introducing genetic tests into the market outside of the scope of the traditional health-care system. There is a sort of a paradox between the lagging implementation in health care of the few genetic tests with proven clinical utility, on the one hand, and the speedy DTC offer of tests, with or without clinical utility. To translate research findings into appropriate clinical applications, assessment of the clinical validity and utility is needed. Many of the parameters needed in assessment frameworks are not available yet. Clinically relevant associations between genetic variants and disease risks have been established, e.g., in oncogenetics and cardiogenetics, and can be used to reflect on the possibilities and obstacles in using the new genetics in public health. In the absence of sufficient information on clinical validity and clinical utility, introduction of genetic tests in common complex disorders is often premature. Priority should be given to settings where clinical utility is proven or likely, to gain additional information concerning diagnosis, prognosis, and disease management. Monitoring and evaluation are essential.
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.