Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28345121›Full record

Trial reportJournal of genetic counseling2017

Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Genomic Counseling for Patients Receiving Personalized and Actionable Complex Disease Reports.

Kevin Sweet, Amy C Sturm, Tara Schmidlen, Joseph McElroy, Laura Scheinfeldt, Kandamurugu Manickam, Erynn S Gordon, Shelly Hovick, J Scott Roberts, Amanda Ewart Toland and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of genetic counseling, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Recovery behavior patterns after varicose vein procedures: A critical reappraisal.Journal of vascular surgery. Venous and lymphatic disorders · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A primer to clinical genome sequencing.Current opinion in pediatrics · 2017
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Kevin SweetDivision of Human Genetics, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, 43420, USA. Kevin.Sweet@osumc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9131-347X
Amy C SturmDivision of Human Genetics, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, 43420, USA.
Tara SchmidlenCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Joseph McElroyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biostatistics, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA.
Laura ScheinfeldtCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Kandamurugu ManickamGeisinger Health System, Genomic Medicine Institute, Precision Health Center, 190 Welles Street, Suite 128, Forty Fort, PA, 18704, USA.
Erynn S GordonCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Shelly HovickSchool of Communication, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43214, USA.
J Scott RobertsDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Amanda Ewart TolandDivision of Human Genetics, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, 43420, USA.
Michael ChristmanCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Coriell Institute For Medical Research · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · USColumbus Center · USGeisinger Health System · USMichigan Department of Health and Human Services · USThe Ohio State University · US

Funding

The Ohio State University Center for clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR001070 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JACKSON, REBECCA D · 2013 to 2017
$22.6M
Assessing the utility of genomic counseling for common complex diseasesR21HG006575 · NHGRI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI CHRISTMAN, MICHAEL F, SWEET, KEVIN M. · 2013 to 2014
$477k
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences UL1TR001070National Human Genome Research Institute (US) R21HG006575NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001070NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG006575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been very limited study of patients with chronic disease receiving potentially actionable genomic based results or the utilization of genetic counselors in the online result delivery process. We conducted a randomized controlled trial on 199 patients with chronic disease each receiving eight personalized and actionable complex disease reports online. Primary study aims were to assess the impact of in-person genomic counseling on 1) causal attribution of disease risk, 2) personal awareness of disease risk, and 3) perceived risk of developing a particular disease. Of 98 intervention arm participants (mean age = 57.8; 39% female) randomized for in-person genomic counseling, 76 (78%) were seen. In contrast, control arm participants (n = 101; mean age = 58.5; 54% female) were initially not offered genomic counseling as part of the study protocol but were able to access in-person genomic counseling, if they requested it, 3-months post viewing of at least one test report and post-completion of the study-specific follow-up survey. A total of 64 intervention arm and 59 control arm participants completed follow-up survey measures. We found that participants receiving in-person genomic counseling had enhanced objective understanding of the genetic variant risk contribution for multiple complex diseases. Genomic counseling was associated with lowered participant causal beliefs in genetic influence across all eight diseases, compared to control participants. Our findings also illustrate that for the majority of diseases under study, intervention arm participants believed they knew their genetic risk status better than control arm subjects. Disease risk was modified for the majority during genomic counseling, due to the assessment of more comprehensive family history. In conclusion, for patients receiving personalized and actionable genomic results through a web portal, genomic counseling enhanced their objective understanding of the genetic variant risk contribution to multiple common diseases. These results support the development of additional genomic counseling interventions to ensure a high level of patient comprehension and improve patient-centered health outcomes.

Indexed as

AdultChronic DiseaseElectronic Health RecordsFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseGenetic TestingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysician-Patient RelationsRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesCausal beliefsComplex diseaseCounselingGeneticGenomicRisk perception

Identifiers

PMID28345121
PMCPMC5617760
OpenAlexW2599319441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.