Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29460110›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2018

Operationalizing the Reciprocal Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice: a Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Genomic Counseling and Testing.

Tara Schmidlen, Amy C Sturm, Shelly Hovick, Laura Scheinfeldt, J Scott Roberts, Lindsey Morr, Joseph McElroy, Amanda E Toland, Michael Christman, Julianne M O'Daniel and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. The role of digital tools in the delivery of genomic medicine: enhancing patient-centered care.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

14 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Tara SchmidlenGenomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA.
Amy C SturmGenomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA.
Shelly HovickSchool of Communication, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43214, USA.
Laura ScheinfeldtCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
J Scott RobertsDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Lindsey MorrSchool of Communication, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43214, USA.
Joseph McElroyDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biostatistics, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA.
Amanda E TolandDivision of Human Genetics, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 2012 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA.
Michael ChristmanCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Julianne M O'DanielDepartment of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Erynn S GordonCoriell Institute for Medical Research, 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ, 08103, USA.
Barbara A BernhardtDivision of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Kelly E OrmondDepartment of Genetics and Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
Kevin SweetDivision of Human Genetics, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, 2012 Kenny Road, Columbus, OH, 43221, USA. Kevin.Sweet@osumc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-9131-347X
Coriell Institute For Medical Research · USThe Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center · USThe Ohio State University · USColumbus Center · USMichigan Department of Health and Human Services · USStanford Medicine · USTranslational Therapeutics (United States) · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

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
NHGRI NIH HHS R21 HG006575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the advent of widespread genomic testing for diagnostic indications and disease risk assessment, there is increased need to optimize genetic counseling services to support the scalable delivery of precision medicine. Here, we describe how we operationalized the reciprocal engagement model of genetic counseling practice to develop a framework of counseling components and strategies for the delivery of genomic results. This framework was constructed based upon qualitative research with patients receiving genomic counseling following online receipt of potentially actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomics reports. Consultation with a transdisciplinary group of investigators, including practicing genetic counselors, was sought to ensure broad scope and applicability of these strategies for use with any large-scale genomic testing effort. We preserve the provision of pre-test education and informed consent as established in Mendelian/single-gene disease genetic counseling practice. Following receipt of genomic results, patients are afforded the opportunity to tailor the counseling agenda by selecting the specific test results they wish to discuss, specifying questions for discussion, and indicating their preference for counseling modality. The genetic counselor uses these patient preferences to set the genomic counseling session and to personalize result communication and risk reduction recommendations. Tailored visual aids and result summary reports divide areas of risk (genetic variant, family history, lifestyle) for each disease to facilitate discussion of multiple disease risks. Post-counseling, session summary reports are actively routed to both the patient and their physician team to encourage review and follow-up. Given the breadth of genomic information potentially resulting from genomic testing, this framework is put forth as a starting point to meet the need for scalable genetic counseling services in the delivery of precision medicine.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingGenomicsCommunicationCounselorsGenetic CounselingHumansPharmacogeneticsPhysiciansPrecision MedicineQualitative ResearchResearch DesignGenetic counselingGenomic counselingGenomicsGenomic testingModalityPrecision medicineService delivery

Identifiers

PMID29460110
PMCPMC6098987
OpenAlexW2790181398

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.