ArticleMDM policy & practice
Development and Validation of a Genomic Knowledge Scale to Advance Informed Decision Making Research in Genomic Sequencing.
Article in MDM policy & practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Measures for Individuals Who Underwent Genetic Testing for Heritable Cancer.The patient · 2026Pooled it
- A WeChat-Based Decision Aid Intervention to Promote Informed Decision-Making for Family Members Regarding the Genetic Testing of Patients With Colorectal Cancer: Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Genetic literacy assessment among medical students using the Indonesian adaptation of the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale: Translation and Psychometric Validation in Japanese Populations.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Public attitudes toward cascade genetic screening in the United States.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Article
- Consent, Concern, and Capacity: Factors Associated With Attitudes Toward Pharmacogenetic Testing Among Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Development and psychometric evaluation of a new genetic attitudes questionnaire in two national samples of United States residents.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Empowerment of parents of infants with congenital heart disease after rapid genome sequencing : April 11, 2025, revised June 20, 2025.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Childhood outcomes of fetal genomic copy-number variants: The prenatal microarray cohort study.Genetics in medicine open · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing pharmacogenomic literacy in China through validation of the Chinese version of the Minnesota Assessment of Pharmacogenomic Literacy.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- Diagnostic yield and psychological outcomes among women pursuing trio-exome sequencing: Do women with recurrent anomalous fetal phenotypes experience more negative psychological outcomes?Prenatal diagnosis · 2023Article
- Summary of the experiences, knowledge, medical management, and family communication of monoallelic MUTYH carriers.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Article
- Article
- Development and validation of the Vanderbilt PRS-KS, an instrument to quantify polygenic risk score knowledge.Genetics in medicine open · 2023Article
- Understanding changes in genetic literacy over time and in genetic research participants.American journal of human genetics · 2022Article
- Patient and provider perspectives on polygenic risk scores: implications for clinical reporting and utilization.Genome medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study evaluated the psychometric properties of a new, comprehensive measure of knowledge about genomic sequencing, the University of North Carolina Genomic Knowledge Scale (UNC-GKS).
methodsThe UNC-GKS assesses knowledge in four domains thought to be critical for informed decision making about genomic sequencing. The scale was validated using classical test theory and item response theory in 286 adult patients and 132 parents of pediatric patients undergoing diagnostic whole exome sequencing (WES) in the NCGENES study.
resultsThe UNC-GKS assessed a single underlying construct (genomic knowledge) with good internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90). Scores were most informative (able to discriminate between individuals with different levels of genomic knowledge) at one standard deviation above the scale mean or lower, a range that included most participants. Convergent validity was supported by associations with health literacy and numeracy ( DISCUSSION: Findings supported the promise of the UNC-GKS as a valid and reliable measure of genomic knowledge among people facing complex decisions about WES and comparable sequencing methods. It is neither disease- nor population-specific, and it functioned well across important subgroups, making it usable in diverse populations.
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.