Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28669097›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2017

Medical education in pharmacogenomics-results from a survey on pharmacogenetic knowledge in healthcare professionals within the European pharmacogenomics clinical implementation project Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics (U-PGx).

Katja Susanne Just, Michael Steffens, Jesse Joachim Swen, George P Patrinos, Henk-Jan Guchelaar, Julia Carolin Stingl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Reimagining pharmacology education.Pharmacological reviews · 2026
    Review
  3. Pharmacogenomics knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions among pharmacists in the Asir Region, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional analysis.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Toward Integration of Pharmacogenomic Tests into Daily Clinical Practice: A General Survey for Polish Healthcare Workers.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023
    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

6 authors.

Katja Susanne JustResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, University Bonn Medical School, Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175, Bonn, Germany.
Michael SteffensResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, University Bonn Medical School, Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175, Bonn, Germany.
Jesse Joachim SwenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
George P PatrinosDepartment of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Henk-Jan GuchelaarDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Julia Carolin StinglResearch Division, Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices, University Bonn Medical School, Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Allee 3, 53175, Bonn, Germany. julia.stingl@bfarm.de.

Funding

Horizon 2020 668353
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDue to the diversity within Europe, the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing in clinical practice faces specific challenges. In the context of the European pharmacogenomics implementation project "Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics" (U-PGx; funded by the European Commission), we studied the current educational background.

methodsWe developed a questionnaire including 29 questions. It was spread out to healthcare professionals working at the future implementation sites (in Austria, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain and Great Britain) of the U-PGx project in preparation of an educational programme. Aim of the survey was to analyse the current educational situation at the implementation sites.

resultsIn total, 70 healthcare professionals participated in the survey. Of participants, 84.3% found pharmacogenomics relevant to their current practice, but experience was still rare. More than two-thirds (65.7%) did not order nor recommend a pharmacogenomic test in the past year. This was mainly attributed to not having enough knowledge on pharmacogenomics (40.0%). Needs were identified in application of pharmacogenomics (identifying drugs 41.4%, interpreting test results 37.2%) as well as in underlining mechanisms (better knowledge on drug metabolism 67.1%, better knowledge on basic principles of pharmacogenomics 60.0%).

conclusionsThis study analysed the specific attitudes, experience and education on pharmacogenomics of future users. There was a general positive attitude and interest towards pharmacogenomic testing. However, the grade of own experience, and knowledge about application and interpretation of pharmacogenomics caused uncertainty. Thus, education and training programmes may be helpful for implementation of pharmacogenomics at a homogenous level within Europe.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalEuropeHealth PersonnelHumansPharmacogeneticsPharmacogenomic TestingPharmacogenomic VariantsPharmacology, ClinicalSurveys and QuestionnairesClinical pharmacologyCultural diversityMedical educationPharmacogeneticsPharmacogenomics

Identifiers

PMID28669097
PMCPMC5599468

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.