ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2019
Behavioral and social scientists' reflections on genomics: a systematic evaluation within the Society of Behavioral Medicine.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishing an infrastructure to optimize the integration of genomics into research: Results from a precision health needs assessment.Translational behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Advancing precision public health using human genomics: examples from the field and future research opportunities.Genome medicine · 2021Article
- In-vivo design feedback and perceived utility of a genetically-informed smoking risk tool among current smokers in the community.BMC medical genomics · 2021Article
- A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Precision Health: The Role of the Social and Behavioral Sciences in Advancing the Vision.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical and public health translation of genomics could be facilitated by expertise from behavioral medicine, yet genomics has not been a significant focus of the Society of Behavioral Medicine (SBM). SBM convened a working group (WG) to lead a systematic exploration of members' views on: (a) whether SBM should give a higher priority to genomic translation and (b) what efforts, if any, should be made to support this increased engagement. The WG used a stepped process over 2 years that began by gaining input from SBM leadership regarding key issues and suggestions for approach, engaging a cross section of membership to expand and record these discussions, followed by systematic qualitative analyses to inform priority action steps. Discussions with SBM leaders and members suggested that genomics was relevant to SBM, particularly for junior members. SBM members' expertise in social and behavioral theory, and implementation study designs, were viewed as highly relevant to genomic translation. Participants expressed that behavioral and social scientists should be engaged in translational genomics work, giving special attention to health disparities. Proposed action steps are aligned with a "push-pull" framework of innovation dissemination. "Push" strategies aim to reach potential adopters and included linking members with genomics expertise to those wanting to become involved and raising awareness of evidence-based genomic applications ready for implementation. "Pull" strategies aim to expand demand and included developing partnerships with genomics societies and advocating for funding, study section modifications, and training programs.
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.