ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2014
Introducing genetic testing for cardiovascular disease in primary care: a qualitative study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review of consumers' knowledge, attitudes and experiences of primary health professionals' role in genomic medicine.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Pooled it
- Cardiovascular risk communication strategies in primary prevention. A systematic review with narrative synthesis.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Pooled it
- Acceptability of predictive testing for ischemic heart disease in those with a family history and the impact of results on behavioural intention and behaviour change: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Demographic Determinants Influencing the Adoption of Genetic Testing for Cardiovascular Diseases in Japan - Insights From a Large-Scale Online Survey.Circulation reports · 2024Article
- Precision Medicine-Are We There Yet? A Narrative Review of Precision Medicine's Applicability in Primary Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Polygenic risk scores: improving the prediction of future disease or added complexity?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Case-finding and genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2021Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers towards genetic testing across three rural Illinois communities.Journal of community genetics · 2019Article
- The response to receiving phenotypic and genetic coronary heart disease risk scores and lifestyle advice - a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2016Article
- Chronic disease prevention in primary care: how and when will genomics impact?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile primary care systematically offers conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, genetic tests for coronary heart disease (CHD) are increasingly commercially available to patients. It is unclear how individuals may respond to these new sources of risk information.
aimTo explore how patients who have had a recent conventional cardiovascular risk assessment, perceive additional information from genetic testing for CHD. DESIGN AND
settingQualitative interview study in 12 practices in Nottinghamshire from both urban and rural settings.
methodInterviews were conducted with 29 adults, who consented to genetic testing after having had a conventional cardiovascular risk assessment.
resultsIndividuals' principal motivation for genetic testing was their family history of CHD and a desire to convey the results to their children. After testing, however, there was limited recall of genetic test results and scepticism about the value of informing their children. Participants dealt with conflicting findings from the genetic test, family history, and conventional assessment by either focusing on genetic risk or environmental lifestyle factors. In some participants, genetic test results appeared to reinforce healthy behaviour but others were falsely reassured, despite having an 'above-average' conventional cardiovascular risk score.
conclusionAlthough genetic testing was acceptable, participants were unclear how to interpret genetic risk results. To facilitate healthy behaviour, health professionals should explore patients' understanding of genetic test results in light of their family history and conventional risk assessment.
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.