ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2018
The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review.American journal of human genetics · 2024Pooled it
- The clinical utility of exome and genome sequencing across clinical indications: a systematic review.Human genetics · 2021Pooled it
- ORCA, a values-based decision aid for selecting additional findings from genomic sequencing in adults: Efficacy results from a randomized trial.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022Trial
- 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 · 2021Trial
- Recommendations for return of secondary genomic findings in observational cohort studies.Nature genetics · 2026Review
- Pilot Evaluation of a Digital Pretest Education Platform for Genomic Counseling: Perspectives of Health Care Providers and Patients.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- How to Reduce Time to Genetic Testing: A Video-Based Approach in the Inherited Cardiac Conditions Service.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Interaction of identity and beliefs with genetic literacy.American journal of human genetics · 2026Article
- Opportunities and challenges for paediatricians requesting funded genomic tests for children.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- The development and usability of 'The Genetics Navigator': a digital solution for adult and paediatric clinical genetics services.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Public preferences for the value and implementation of genomic newborn screening: Insights from two discrete choice experiments in Australia.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the digital genetic assistant in technology assisted genetic counseling for genetic carrier screening.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Opportunistic genomic screening has clinical utility: An interventional cohort study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Validation of a guidelines-based digital tool to assess the need for germline cancer genetic testing.Hereditary cancer in clinical practice · 2024Article
- Assessing the Utility of a Patient-Facing Diagnostic Tool Among Individuals With Hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome: Focus Group Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Evaluation of a two-step model of opportunistic genomic screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Prospective cohort study of genomic newborn screening: BabyScreen+ pilot study protocol.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Understanding communication between patients and healthcare professionals regarding comprehensive biomarker testing in precision oncology: A scoping review.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Exploring attitudes and experiences with reproductive genetic carrier screening among couples seeking medically assisted reproduction: a longitudinal survey study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Guidelines recommend patients be informed of their incidental results (IR) when undergoing genomic sequencing (GS), yet there are limited tools to support patients' decisions about learning IR. The aim of this study is to develop and test the usability of a decision aid (DA) to guide patients' selection of IR, and to describe patients' preferences for learning IR following use of the DA. We developed and evaluated a DA using an iterative, mixed-methods process consisting of (1) prototype development, (2) feasibility testing, (3) cognitive interviews, (4) design and programming, and (5) usability testing. We created an interactive online DA called the Genomics ADvISER, a genomics decision AiD about Incidental SEquencing Results. The Genomics ADvISER begins with an educational whiteboard video, and then engages users in a values clarification exercise, knowledge quiz and final choice step, based on a 'binning' framework. Participants found the DA acceptable and intuitive to use. They were enthusiastic towards GS and IR; all selected multiple categories of IR. The Genomics ADvISER is a new patient-centered tool to support the clinical delivery of incidental GS results. The Genomics ADvISER fills critical care gaps, given the health care system's limited genomics expertise and capacity to convey the large volume of IR and their myriad of implications.
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.