Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30835913›Full record

ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2019

Much ado about nothing: A qualitative study of the experiences of an average-risk population receiving results of exome sequencing.

Shannon Rego, Orit Dagan-Rosenfeld, Stephanie A Bivona, Michael P Snyder, Kelly E Ormond

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A systematic literature review of disclosure practices and reported outcomes for medically actionable genomic secondary findings.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shannon RegoDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.ORCID 0000-0003-1910-7441
Orit Dagan-RosenfeldDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Stephanie A BivonaDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Michael P SnyderDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Kelly E OrmondDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.ORCID 0000-0002-1033-0818
Stanford University · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

Stanford Islet Research CoreP30DK116074 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Seung K Kim · 2017 to 2026
$19.5M
Longitudinal Multiomics Microbial Profiling in Healthy and Disease IndividualsU54DE023789 · NIDCR · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SNYDER, MICHAEL P., WEINSTOCK, GEORGE M · 2013 to 2014
$3.0M
NIDCR NIH HHS U54 DE023789NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK116074
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing availability of exome sequencing to the general ("healthy") population raises questions about the implications of genomic testing for individuals without suspected Mendelian diseases. Little is known about this population's motivations for undergoing exome sequencing, their expectations, reactions, and perceptions of utility. In order to address these questions, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 participants recruited from a longitudinal multi-omics profiling study that included exome sequencing. Participants were interviewed after receiving exome results, which included Mendelian disease-associated pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants, pharmacogenetic variants, and risk assessments for multifactorial diseases such as type 2 diabetes. The primary motivation driving participation in exome sequencing was personal curiosity. While they reported feeling validation and relief, participants were frequently underwhelmed by the results and described having expected more from exome sequencing. All participants reported discussing the results with at least some family, friends, and healthcare providers. Participants' recollection of the results returned to them was sometimes incorrect or incomplete, in many cases aligning with their perceptions of their health risks when entering the study. These results underscore the need for different genetic counseling approaches for generally healthy patients undergoing exome sequencing, in particular the need to provide anticipatory guidance to moderate participants' expectations. They also provide a preview of potential challenges clinicians may face as genomic sequencing continues to scale-up in the general population despite a lack of full understanding of its impact.

Indexed as

Exome SequencingGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseAgedDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2ExomeFemaleGenetic TestingHumansMaleMiddle AgedQualitative Researchgenomic sequencingpatient perspectivesperceived utilitywhole-exome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID30835913
PMCPMC6456364
OpenAlexW2919630537

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.