ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2015
Genetic testing of children for adult-onset conditions: opinions of the British adult population and implications for clinical practice.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Family Communication, Risk Perception and Cancer Knowledge of Young Adults from BRCA1/2 Families: a Systematic Review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Pooled it
- Pediatric DTC Genetic Testing for Adult-Onset Inherited Cancer Risk: The Perspectives of High-Risk Parents.Public health genomics · 2025Article
- Measuring high-risk parents' opinions about direct-to-consumer genetic testing for adult-onset inherited cancer syndromes in their adolescent and young adult children.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Article
- Age-Based Genomic Screening during Childhood: Ethical and Practical Considerations in Public Health Genomics Implementation.International journal of neonatal screening · 2023Article
- KIT-Associated Familial GIST Syndrome: Response to Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors and Implications for Risk Management.The oncologist · 2022Article
- Parental Guidance Suggested: Engaging Parents as Partners in Research Studies of Genomic Screening for a Pediatric Population.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Next-Generation Sequencing in Newborn Screening: A Review of Current State.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Review
- Parent Perspectives Towards Genetic and Epigenetic Testing for Autism Spectrum Disorder.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2020Article
- Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges.Neurobiology of disease · 2020Review
- Article
- Adolescents' and Parents' Genomic Testing Decisions: Associations With Age, Race, and Sex.The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine · 2020Article
- Genome sequencing in healthcare: understanding the UK general public's views and implications for clinical practice.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2020Article
- Qualitative Research on Expanded Prenatal and Newborn Screening: Robust but Marginalized.The Hastings Center report · 2019Article
- Paediatric genomics: diagnosing rare disease in children.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018Review
- Predictive Genetic Testing of Children for Adult-Onset Conditions: Negotiating Requests with Parents.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Parents' interest in genetic testing of their offspring in multiplex epilepsy families.Epilepsia · 2016Article
- Management of Incidental Findings in the Era of Next-generation Sequencing.Current genomics · 2015Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study set out to explore the attitudes of a representative sample of the British public towards genetic testing in children to predict disease in the future. We sought opinions about genetic testing for adult-onset conditions for which no prevention/treatment is available during childhood, and about genetic 'carrier' status to assess future reproductive risks. The study also examined participants' level of agreement with the reasons professional organisations give in favour of deferring such testing. Participants (n=2998) completed a specially designed questionnaire, distributed by email. Nearly half of the sample (47%) agreed that parents should be able to test their child for adult-onset conditions, even if there is no treatment or prevention at time of testing. This runs contrary to professional guidance about genetic testing in children. Testing for carrier status was supported by a larger proportion (60%). A child's future ability to decide for her/himself if and when to be tested was the least supported argument in favour of deferring testing.
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.