ArticleFrontiers in medicine2019
Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing's Red Herring: "Genetic Ancestry" and Personalized Medicine.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Emerging and evolving values in the changing landscape of genomics.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Reaching for Precision Healthcare in FinlandFrontiers in genetics · 2022Article
- Biobanks and Individual Health Related Findings: from an Obstacle to an Incentive.Science and engineering ethics · 2021Article
- Impacts of personal DNA ancestry testing.Journal of community genetics · 2021Article
- In Defense of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.Integrative medicine (Encinitas, Calif.) · 2019Article
- Diversity, Profit, Control: An Empirical Study of Industry Employees' Views on Ethics in Private Sector Genomics.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The growth in the direct-to-consumer genetic testing industry poses a number of challenges for healthcare practice, among a number of other areas of concern. Several companies providing this service send their customers reports including information variously referred to as genetic ethnicity, genetic heritage, biogeographic ancestry, and genetic ancestry. In this article, we argue that such information should not be used in healthcare consultations or to assess health risks. Far from representing a move toward personalized medicine, use of this information poses risks both to patients as individuals and to racialized ethnic groups because of the way it misrepresents human genetic diversity.
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.