ArticleClinical genetics2016
Measuring genetic knowledge: a brief survey instrument for adolescents and adults.
Article in Clinical genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 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
32 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of a concise video to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in community and academic practice settings.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale: Translation and Psychometric Validation in Japanese Populations.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Psychometric Validation of the Education and Assessment of Genetic Literacy (EAGL) Measure.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Which religious and personal characteristics predict attitudes toward gene editing? Findings from a survey of 4,939 adults in the U.S.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- A Chatbot to Meet Parents' Information Needs for Sickle Cell Trait Newborn Screening Results: Multiple Methods Formative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Consent, Concern, and Capacity: Factors Associated With Attitudes Toward Pharmacogenetic Testing Among Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Utilization of genetics services in the diagnosis of hearing loss in newborns in the state of Ohio.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Attitudes toward genomic health care among Christian dones in the United States.Psychology of religion and spirituality · 2025Article
- Genetic testing and Guangdong college students in China: A cross-sectional study of knowledge and attitudes.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Implications of genetic attributions for addiction among addiction professionals.Journal of psychiatric research · 2024Article
- A video intervention to improve patient understanding of tumor genomic testing in patients with cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Knowledge of genetics and attitudes toward genetic testing among university students in Indonesia.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Promoting advanced medical services in the framework of 3PM-a proof-of-concept by the "Centro" Region of Portugal.The EPMA journal · 2024Review
- Variability in conceptualizations and measurement of genetic literacy.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Investigation of interest in and timing preference for cancer predisposition testing and expanded carrier screening among women of reproductive age.PEC innovation · 2023Article
- Development and Validation of the Minnesota Assessment of Pharmacogenomic Literacy (MAPL).Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- A Scoping Review of Attitudes and Experiences with Pharmacogenomic Testing among Patients and the General Public: Implications for Patient Counseling.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Interest in Cancer Predisposition Testing and Carrier Screening Offered as Part of Routine Healthcare Among an Ethnically Diverse Sample of Young Women.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Knowledge and Attitudes About Genetic Testing Among Black and White Women with Breast Cancer.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Basic knowledge of genetics is essential for understanding genetic testing and counseling. The lack of a written, English language, validated, published measure has limited our ability to evaluate genetic knowledge of patients and families. Here, we begin the psychometric analysis of a true/false genetic knowledge measure. The 18-item measure was completed by parents of children with congenital heart defects (CHD) (n = 465) and adolescents and young adults with CHD (age: 15-25, n = 196) with a mean total correct score of 12.6 [standard deviation (SD) = 3.5, range: 0-18]. Utilizing exploratory factor analysis, we determined that one to three correlated factors, or abilities, were captured by our measure. Through confirmatory factor analysis, we determined that the two factor model was the best fit. Although it was necessary to remove two items, the remaining items exhibited adequate psychometric properties in a multidimensional item response theory analysis. Scores for each factor were computed, and a sum-score conversion table was derived. We conclude that this genetic knowledge measure discriminates best at low knowledge levels and is therefore well suited to determine a minimum adequate amount of genetic knowledge. However, further reliability testing and validation in diverse research and clinical settings is needed.
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.