ReviewDialogues in clinical neuroscience2014
Ethical and public policy challenges for pharmacogenomics.
Review in Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transforming Pharmacogenomics and CRISPR Gene Editing with the Power of Artificial Intelligence for Precision Medicine.Pharmaceutics · 2025Review
- Scoping review of enablers and challenges of implementing pharmacogenomics testing in the primary care settings.BMJ open · 2024Article
- One Step Ahead in Realizing Pharmacogenetics in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: What Should We Do?Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Review
- The Intersection between Pharmacogenomics and Health Equity: A Case Example.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Pharmacogenomics in clinical trials: an overview.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Revisiting Secondary Information Related to Pharmacogenetic Testing.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Person Centered Care and Personalized Medicine: Irreconcilable Opposites or Potential Companions?Health care analysis : HCA : journal of health philosophy and policy · 2019Article
- PharmGKB: A worldwide resource for pharmacogenomic information.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Systems biology and medicine · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
It is timely to consider the ethical and social questions raised by progress in pharmacogenomics, based on the current importance of pharmacogenomics for avoidance of predictable side effects of drugs, and for correct choice of medications in certain cancers. It has been proposed that the entire population be genotyped for drug-metabolizing enzyme polymorphisms, as a measure that would prevent many untoward and dangerous drug reactions. Pharmacologic treatment targeting based on genomics of disease can be expected to increase greatly in the coming years. Policy and ethical issues exist on consent for large-scale genomic pharmacogenomic data collection, public vs corporate ownership of genomic research results, testing efficacy and safety of drugs used for rare genomic indications, and accessibility of treatments based on costly research that is applicable to relatively few patients. In major psychiatric disorders and intellectual deficiency, rare and de novo deletion or duplication of chromosomal segments (copy number variation), in the aggregate, are common causes of increased risk. This implies that the policy problems of pharmacogenomics will be particularly important for the psychiatric disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25733960PMC4336925W179635856What 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.