Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28879178›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2017

Identification of Delivery Models for the Provision of Predictive Genetic Testing in Europe: Protocol for a Multicentre Qualitative Study and a Systematic Review of the Literature.

Brigid Unim, Tyra Lagerberg, Erica Pitini, Corrado De Vito, Maria Rosaria Vacchio, Giovanna Adamo, Annalisa Rosso, Elvira D'Andrea, Carolina Marzuillo, Paolo Villari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Service provision of genetics health care in Portugal.Journal of community genetics · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. The composition and capacity of the clinical genetics workforce in high-income countries: a scoping review.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2020
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

Brigid UnimDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Tyra LagerbergBetter Value HealthCare, Ltd., Oxford, United Kingdom.
Erica PitiniDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Corrado De VitoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Maria Rosaria VacchioDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Giovanna AdamoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Annalisa RossoDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Elvira D'AndreaDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Carolina MarzuilloDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Paolo VillariDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe appropriate application of genomic technologies in healthcare is surrounded by many concerns. In particular, there is a lack of evidence on what constitutes an optimal genetic service delivery model, which depends on the type of genetic test and healthcare context considered. The present project aims to identify, classify, and evaluate delivery models for the provision of predictive genetic testing in Europe and in selected Anglophone extra-European countries (the USA, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). It also sets out to survey the European public health community's readiness to incorporate public health genomics into their practice. MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT: The project consists of (i) a systematic review of published literature and selected country websites, (ii) structured interviews with health experts on the genetic service delivery models in their respective countries, and (iii) a survey of European Public Health Association (EUPHA) members' knowledge and attitudes toward genomics applications in clinical practice. The inclusion criteria for the systematic review are that articles be published in the period 2000-2015; be in English or Italian; and be from European countries or from Canada, the USA, Australia, or New Zealand. Additional policy documents will be retrieved from represented countries' government-affiliated websites. The results of the research will be disseminated through the EUPHA network, the Italian Network for Genomics in Public Health (GENISAP), and seminars and workshops. EXPECTED IMPACT OF THE STUDY ON PUBLIC HEALTH: The transfer of genomic technologies from research to clinical application is influenced not only by several factors inherent to research goals and delivery of healthcare but also by external and commercial interests that may cause the premature introduction of genetic tests in the public and private sectors. Furthermore, current genetic services are delivered without a standardized set of process and outcome measures, which makes the evaluation of healthcare services difficult. The present study will identify and classify delivery models and, subsequently, establish which are appropriate for the provision of predictive genetic testing in Europe by comparing sets of process and outcome measures. In this way, the study will provide a basis for future recommendations to decision makers involved in the financing, delivery, and consumption of genetic services.

Indexed as

expert interviewsgenetic delivery modelsgenetic servicesgenetic testingsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID28879178
PMCPMC5572240

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.