ArticleJournal of community genetics2017
Does personal genome testing drive service utilization in an adult preventive medicine clinic?
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2017. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomized controlled trial of analogue pharmacogenomic testing feedback for psychotropic medications.PEC innovation · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personal genome testing (PGT) that assesses risk for common diseases may influence the use of preventive health services, but outcome data are limited. We aimed to assess health service utilization following PGT. We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study at an adult health clinic. Medical records of clients who pursued PGT at their comprehensive health assessment (CHA) over a 1-year period (N = 388) were reviewed and compared to age- and sex-matched clients who underwent CHA but not PGT (N = 388). We measured condition-specific health services used post CHA up to two subsequent visits while accounting for confounding factors (e.g., family history, health status, and age). A relatively equal number of post CHA services were used by clients who pursued PGT and those who did not pursue PGT (52% and 48%, respectively). Overall and across the majority of conditions examined, clients' service utilization was significantly associated with health status, e.g., clients identified as "at risk" on CHA for heart attack used 2.86 times more services than clients not at risk. Pursuing PGT was not significantly associated with increased use of services post CHA overall or for most of the conditions examined. Our data demonstrate that health status rather than pursuing PGT is the strongest driver of service utilization in this population. Overall, pursuit of PGT and PGT results does not appear to significantly drive the utilization of downstream health services.
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.