ArticleClinical genetics2015
Influence of individual differences in disease perception on consumer response to direct-to-consumer genomic testing.
Article in Clinical genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 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
- EMR documentation of physician-patient communication following genomic counseling for actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomic results.Clinical genetics · 2017Trial
- A randomized trial Examining The Impact Of Communicating Genetic And Lifestyle Risks For Obesity.Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.) · 2016Trial
- Enhancing health outcomes through genetic-based personalized nutrition: investigating the effects of dietary behavior change.BMC nutrition · 2026Article
- Clinical translation of polygenic scores for prostate cancer screening.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Adolescent and Young Adult Perspectives on Receiving Pathogenic or Likely Pathogenic Results in a Prospective Genomic Screening Clinical Trial.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Impact of polygeNic risk score for glaucoma on psycHosocial ouTcomes (INSiGHT) study protocol.PloS one · 2024Article
- Advancing the communication of genetic risk for cardiometabolic diseases: a critical interpretive synthesis.BMC medicine · 2023Article
- Considerations for developing regulations for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a scoping review using the 3-I framework.Journal of community genetics · 2022Article
- DNA-based screening and personal health: a points to consider statement for individuals and health-care providers from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Physician-guided, hybrid genetic testing exerts promising effects on health-related behavior without compromising quality of life.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Teenagers and Precision Psychiatry: A Window of Opportunity.Public health genomics · 2021Article
- Paving the way to better population health through personalised nutrition.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
- What do people think about genetics? A systematic review.Journal of community genetics · 2019Review
- Learning one's genetic risk changes physiology independent of actual genetic risk.Nature human behaviour · 2019Article
- The 10th Oxbridge varsity medical ethics debate-should we fear the rise of direct-to-consumer genetic testing?Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2018Article
- Predictors of adverse psychological experiences surrounding genome-wide profiling for disease risk.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- Medicine, market and communication: ethical considerations in regard to persuasive communication in direct-to-consumer genetic testing services.BMC medical ethics · 2018Article
- Recent developments in genetics and medically assisted reproduction: from research to clinical applications.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2018Review
- Behavioural changes, sharing behaviour and psychological responses after receiving direct-to-consumer genetic test results: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of community genetics · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individuals who undergo multiplex direct-to-consumer (DTC) genomic testing receive genetic risk results for multiple conditions. To date, research has not investigated the influence of individual differences in disease perceptions among consumers on testing outcomes. A total of 2037 participants received DTC genomic testing and completed baseline and follow-up surveys assessing disease perceptions and health behaviors. Participants were asked to indicate their most feared disease of those tested. Perceived seriousness and controllability of the disease via lifestyle or medical intervention were assessed. Participants most frequently reported heart attack (19.1%) and Alzheimer's disease (18.6%) as their most feared disease. Perceived seriousness and control over the feared disease both influenced response to DTC genomic testing. Greater perceived seriousness and diminished perceived control were associated with higher, but not clinically significant levels of anxiety and distress. In some cases these associations were modified by genetic risk. No significant associations were observed for diet, exercise and screening behaviors. Individual differences in disease perceptions influence psychological outcomes following DTC genomic testing. Higher perceived seriousness may make a consumer more psychologically sensitive to test results and greater perceived control may protect against adverse psychological outcomes. Findings may inform development of educational and counseling services.
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.