ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2016
Impact of Genomic Counseling on Informed Decision-Making among ostensibly Healthy Individuals Seeking Personal Genome Sequencing: the HealthSeq Project.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Parents' perspectives on expanded newborn genomic screening in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Primary Care Implementation of Genomic Population Health Screening Using a Large Gene Sequencing Panel.Frontiers in 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
- "Is that something that should concern me?": a qualitative exploration of parent understanding of their child's genomic test results.HGG advances · 2021Article
- Development and Validation of a Comprehensive Genomics Knowledge Scale.Public health genomics · 2021Article
- Article
- Roles of attitudes and injunctive norms in decisional conflict and disclosure following receipt of genome sequencing results.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2020Article
- Should pretest genetic counselling be required for patients pursuing genomic sequencing? Results from a survey of participants in a large genomic implementation study.Journal of medical genetics · 2019Article
- Impacts of incorporating personal genome sequencing into graduate genomics education: a longitudinal study over three course years.BMC medical genomics · 2018Article
- Psychological and behavioural impact of returning personal results from whole-genome sequencing: the HealthSeq project.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Article
- Personal Genome Sequencing in Ostensibly Healthy Individuals and the PeopleSeq Consortium.Journal of personalized medicine · 2016Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of 'genomic counseling' on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants' informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants' satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = -4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26898680What 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.