ArticleThe Hastings Center report2019
Assessing the Psychological Impact of Genetic Susceptibility Testing.
Article in The Hastings Center report, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychological impacts of APOE genotype disclosure among Latinos in New York City: a randomized controlled trial.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Trial
- Schoolhouse risk: Can we mitigate the polygenic Pygmalion effect?Acta psychologica · 2024Trial
- Asymmetrical genetic attributions for the presence and absence of health problems.Psychology & health · 2024Trial
- Views and experiences regarding workplace genetic testing: findings from a national survey of U.S. employees.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Viewing direct-to-consumer genetic test results for depression risk is psychologically well tolerated: Evidence from a longitudinal equivalence study.HGG advances · 2026Article
- Perceived understanding and psychosocial outcomes: employees' responses to learning results of workplace genetic testing.Personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Patient perspectives after receiving simulated preconception polygenic risk scores (PRS) for family planning.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Interest in and Experience with Genetic Testing for Late-Onset Medical Conditions: Results from the National Poll on Healthy Aging.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2024Article
- Editorial: Implications of Emerging Uses of Genetic Testing for Alzheimer's Disease.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2023Article
- Attitudes toward pre-symptomatic screening for Alzheimer's dementia in five European countries: a comparison of family members of people with Alzheimer's dementiaFrontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Factors Associated with the Uptake of Genetic Testing for Cancer Risks: A Pathway Analysis Using the Health Information National Trends Survey Data.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Polygenic risk scores: improving the prediction of future disease or added complexity?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Polygenic risk scores in the clinic: new perspectives needed on familiar ethical issues.Genome medicine · 2021Article
- Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges.Neurobiology of disease · 2020Review
- Designing and implementing the IDEAL Study: A randomized clinical trial ofAlzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
The expanded use of genetic testing raises key ethical and policy questions about possible benefits and harms for those receiving disease-risk information. As predictive testing for Huntington's was initiated in a clinical setting, survey research posing hypothetical test scenarios suggested that the vast majority of at-risk relatives wanted to know whether they carried a disease-causing mutation. However, only a small minority ultimately availed themselves of this opportunity. Many at-risk individuals concluded that a positive test result would be too psychologically overwhelming. A substantial literature suggests that individuals are often more resilient than anticipated in coping with many different health-related stresses. Much of my own work in the field has been through the Risk Evaluation & Education for Alzheimer's Disease study (REVEAL), a series of randomized clinical trials assessing the impact of genetic susceptibility testing on asymptomatic individuals at risk for Alzheimer's disease. Our experience in developing and implementing four successive, multisite trials provides some potentially useful lessons for the field. More people will be asking for their personal genetic information. Better understanding will help us decide when access is appropriate and how best to disclose results in a manner that supports adjustment to test findings and promotes use of genetic information to improve human health.
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.