SynthesisEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2018
A theory-informed systematic review of clinicians' genetic testing practices.
Synthesis 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 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The design, implementation, and effectiveness of intervention strategies aimed at improving genetic referral practices: a systematic review of the literature.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Pooled it
- Breaking barriers to completing genetic testing for inherited breast cancer among at-risk Black women using a community-based participatory research approach.HGG advances · 2026Article
- Opportunities and challenges for paediatricians requesting funded genomic tests for children.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- Phenotype driven molecular genetic test recommendation for diagnosing pediatric rare disorders.NPJ digital medicine · 2024Article
- Survey of the Landscape of Society Practice Guidelines for Genetic Testing of Neurodevelopmental Disorders.Annals of neurology · 2024Review
- Genomics in nephrology: identifying informatics opportunities to improve diagnosis of genetic kidney disorders using a human-centered design approach.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024Article
- Genetic testing and gene therapy in retinal diseases: Knowledge and perceptions of optometrists in Australia and New Zealand.Clinical genetics · 2024Article
- Phenotype-Driven Molecular Genetic Test Recommendation for Diagnosing Pediatric Rare Disorders.Research square · 2023Article
- Aligning intuition and theory: a novel approach to identifying the determinants of behaviours necessary to support implementation of evidence into practice.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
- Article
- Pharmacogenomic testing: perception of clinical utility, enablers and barriers to adoption in Australian hospitals.Internal medicine journal · 2022Article
- Lessons learned: next-generation sequencing applied to undiagnosed genetic diseases.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2022Review
- Adherence of those at low risk of disease to public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Investigating the Adoption of Clinical Genomics in Australia. An Implementation Science Case Study.Genes · 2021Article
- Attitudes and Practices of Australian Nephrologists Toward Implementation of Clinical Genomics.Kidney international reports · 2021Article
- Evaluation of a Genetics Education Program for Health Interpreters: A Pilot Study.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- How genomic information is accessed in clinical practice: an electronic survey of UK general practitioners.Journal of community genetics · 2020Article
- Preparing Medical Specialists for Genomic Medicine: Continuing Education Should Include Opportunities for Experiential Learning.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- Development of an Evidence-Based, Theory-Informed National Survey of Physician Preparedness for Genomic Medicine and Preferences for Genomics Continuing Education.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic literature review investigates factors impacting on clinicians' decisions to offer genetic tests in their practice, and maps them to a theoretical behaviour change framework. Better understanding of these factors will inform the design of effective interventions to integrate genomics tests into clinical care. We conducted a narrative synthesis of empirical research of medical specialists' perspectives on and experiences of offering genetic tests to their patients. This review was based upon the PRISMA statement and guidelines for reviewing qualitative research. Four electronic data sources were searched-MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed. Studies were independently assessed by two authors. Content analysis was applied to map the findings of included studies to a framework validated for behaviour and implementation research, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The TDF describes 14 factors known to influence behaviour and has been applied in diverse clinical settings to understand and/or modify health professional behaviour. Thirty-four studies published in 39 articles met inclusion and quality criteria. Most studies were published after 2011 (54%), Northern American (82%), quantitative in design (68%) and addressed familial cancer genetic tests (53%). Of the 14 TDF factors, 13 were identified. The three most common factors were: Environmental Context and Resources (n = 33), Beliefs about Consequences (n = 26), and Knowledge (n = 23). To support the adoption of genomic tests beyond specialist services, nuanced interventions targeting considerations beyond clinician education are needed. For instance, interventions addressing organisational constraints which may restrict clinicians' ability to offer genomic tests are required alongside those targeting factors intrinsic to the clinician.
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.