ArticleBMC public health2018
Rural-urban and racial-ethnic differences in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.
Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.
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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Perceived Barriers to Genetics and Precision Medicine Among Rural Participants in a Large Academic Biobank: A Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Trends in awareness and uptake of genetic testing among the United States population, 2011-2022.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Patient Perspectives and Demographic Factors Influencing Non-Participation in a Large Genomics Study.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026Article
- Multi-cancer early detection tests: national estimates of awareness and perceived value in the United States.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Article
- A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Beliefs and perceptions of genetic testing by clinical, demographic, and health characteristics: A U.S.-based study utilizing the health information national trends (HINTS) survey.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Prevalence of clinician-ordered genetic testing in rural and urban United States counties: An analysis of the 2022 Health Information National Trends Survey.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Genomic Medicine: Considerations for Addressing Health Equity.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2025Article
- Multidisciplinary stakeholder-informed identification of key characteristics for implementation of workplace genetic testing.HGG advances · 2025Article
- One size does not fit all: the personal nature of completed embryo donation.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Cascade genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: a review of barriers and breakthroughs.Familial cancer · 2024Review
- Awareness, use, motivations and methods of accessing genetic testing in 2022 in the United States.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Access to Care and Healthcare Quality Metrics for Patients with Advanced Genitourinary Cancers in Urban versus Rural Areas.Cancers · 2023Article
- Urban-Rural and Socioeconomic Differences in Patient Knowledge and Perceptions of Genomic Tumor Testing.JCO precision oncology · 2023Article
- Awareness and utilization of genetic testing among Hispanic and Latino adults living in the US: The Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.HGG advances · 2023Article
- Awareness and use of genetic testing: An analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey 2020.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Article
- Rural-Urban Disparities in Cancer Outcomes: Opportunities for Future Research.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2022Review
- Utilizing Public Health Frameworks and Partnerships to Ensure Equity in DNA-Based Population Screening.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Knowledge and Attitudes about Privacy and Secondary Data Use among African-Americans Using Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.Public health genomics · 2022Article
- Public Interest in Population Genetic Screening for Cancer Risk.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccess to direct-to-consumer genetic testing services has increased in recent years. However, disparities in knowledge and awareness of these services are not well documented. We examined awareness of genetic testing services by rural/urban and racial/ethnic status.
methodsAnalyses were conducted using pooled cross-sectional data from 4 waves (2011-2014) of the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Descriptive statistics compared sample characteristics and information sources by rural/urban residence. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between geography, racial/ethnic status, and awareness of genetic testing, controlling for sociodemographic characteristics.
resultsOf 13,749 respondents, 16.7% resided in rural areas, 13.8% were Hispanic, and 10.1% were non-Hispanic black. Rural residents were less likely than urban residents to report awareness of genetic testing (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.63-0.87). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, racial/ethnic minorities were less likely to be aware of genetic testing: Hispanic (OR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.56-0.82); and non-Hispanic black (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.61-0.90).
conclusionsRural-urban and racial-ethnic differences exist in awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. These differences may translate into disparities in the uptake of genetic testing, health behavior change, and disease prevention through precision and personalized medicine.
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.