ArticleJournal of genetic counseling1999
Are General Practitioners Willing and Able to Provide Genetic Services for Common Diseases?
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Barriers to translating emerging genetic research on smoking into clinical practice. Perspectives of primary care physicians.Journal of general internal medicine · 2005Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Primary care in the United Kingdom has been advocated as an optimal location for the provision of genetic services for common diseases. Little, however, is known about general practitioners' own views toward this suggestion or the possible demand for such services from patients. To assess general practitioners' attitudes to providing genetic services for common diseases, and to estimate the demand from patients for these services, we used a single-page postal questionnaire survey of all 359 general practitioners registered with the Oxfordshire Health Authority; 339 (94%) responded. These physicians reported that a mean 4.1 patients (95% CI, 3.3-4.9) out of every 1,000 consulting them were concerned about their own risk of a common disease associated with a diagnosis in a family member. Half of the general practitioners (95% CI, 45-56%) counseled about genetics in the last year. A majority of general practitioners accept the need to provide genetic services, but far fewer are competent to do so. Although 60% (95% CI, 55-65%) believed they should be involved with genetic screening for common diseases, only 29% (95% CI, 24-34%) felt sufficiently prepared to take family histories and draw pedigrees, and only 15% (95% CI, 11-19%) felt sufficiently prepared to counsel patients about their genetic test results. Given the necessary training and information, 63% (95% CI, 58-68%) and 64% (95% CI, 59-69%) were willing to provide these services. Even with training and information, not all would be willing to provide these services, and lack of time may be a major deterrent. "Practice-enabling" strategies, such as computerized aids in genetics, may be useful.
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.