Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30921347›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Personal genome testing on physicians improves attitudes on pharmacogenomic approaches.

Kye Hwa Lee, Byung Joo Min, Ju Han Kim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. An objective evaluation of fundamental pharmacogenomics knowledge among pharmacists and pharmacy students.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. The Role of Electronic Health Records in Advancing Genomic Medicine.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Kye Hwa LeeCenter for Precision Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-7593-7020
Byung Joo MinSeoul National University Biomedical Informatics (SNUBI) and Systems Biomedical Informatics Research Center, Division of Biomedical Informatics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Ju Han KimSeoul National University Biomedical Informatics (SNUBI) and Systems Biomedical Informatics Research Center, Division of Biomedical Informatics, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-1522-9038

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this era of clinical genomics, the accumulation of knowledge of pharmacogenomics (PGx) is rising dramatically and attempts to utilize it in clinical practice are also increasing. However, this advanced knowledge and information have not yet been sufficiently utilized in the clinical field due to various barriers including physician factors. This study was conducted to evaluate the attitudes of physicians to PGx services by providing them their own genomic data analysis report focusing on PGx. We also tried to evaluate the clinical applicability of whole exome sequencing (WES)-based functional PGx test. In total 88 physicians participated in the study from September 2015 to August 2016. Physicians who agreed to participate in the study were asked to complete a pre-test survey evaluating their knowledge of and attitude toward clinical genomics including PGx. Only those who completed the pre-test survey proceeded to WES and were provided with a personal PGx analysis report in an offline group meeting. Physicians who received these PGx reports were asked to complete a follow-up survey within two weeks. We then analyzed changes in their knowledge and attitude after reviewing their own PGx analysis results through differences in their pre-test and post-test survey responses. In total, 70 physicians (79.5%) completed the pre-test and post-test surveys and attended an off-line seminar to review their personal PGx reports. After physicians reviewed the report, their perception of and attitude towards the PGx domain and genomics significantly changed. Physician' awareness of the likelihood of occurrence of adverse drug reactions and genetic contribution was also changed significantly. Overall, physicians were very positive about the value and potential of the PGx test but maintained a conservative stance on its actual clinical use. Results revealed that physicians' perception and attitude to the utility of PGx testing was significantly changed after reviewing their own WES results.

Indexed as

AttitudePharmacogenomic TestingAdultDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsExome SequencingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID30921347
PMCPMC6438681

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.