ArticleBMJ open2019
Health outcomes, utility and costs of returning incidental results from genomic sequencing in a Canadian cancer population: protocol for a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03597165 (The Health Outcomes, Utility, and Costs of Returning Incidental Genomic Findings), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
The Health Outcomes, Utility, and Costs of Returning Incidental Genomic Findings
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The development and usability of 'The Genetics Navigator': a digital solution for adult and paediatric clinical genetics services.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
- "Incidentally" discovered Von Hippel Lindau disease: an emerging clinical phenotype.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Opportunistic genomic screening has clinical utility: An interventional cohort study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- "I don't need any more unknowns hanging over my head": Views of patients with cancer on variants of uncertain significance and low/moderate risk results from genomic sequencing.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2023Article
- Great expectations: patients' preferences for clinically significant results from genomic sequencing.Human genetics · 2023Article
- A comprehensive genomic reporting structure for communicating all clinically significant primary and secondary findings.Human genetics · 2022Article
- Article
- Beyond medically actionable results: an analytical pipeline for decreasing the burden of returning all clinically significant secondary findings.Human genetics · 2021Article
- Health-care practitioners' preferences for the return of secondary findings from next-generation sequencing: a discrete choice experiment.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 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
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionGenomic sequencing has rapidly transitioned into clinical practice, improving diagnosis and treatment options for patients with hereditary disorders. However, large-scale implementation of genomic sequencing faces challenges, especially with regard to the return of incidental results, which refer to genetic variants uncovered during testing that are unrelated to the primary disease under investigation, but of potential clinical significance. High-quality evidence evaluating health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results is critical for the adoption of genomic sequencing into clinical care and to understand the unintended consequences of adoption of genomic sequencing. We aim to evaluate the health outcomes and costs of receiving incidental results for patients undergoing genomic sequencing. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will compare health outcomes and costs of receiving, versus not receiving, incidental results for adult patients with cancer undergoing genomic sequencing in a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial. Two hundred and sixty patients who have previously undergone first or second-tier genetic testing for cancer and received uninformative results will be recruited from familial cancer clinics in Toronto, Ontario. Participants in both arms will receive cancer-related results. Participants in the intervention arm have the option to receive incidental results. Our primary outcome is psychological distress at 2 weeks following return of results. Secondary outcomes include behavioural consequences, clinical and personal utility assessed over the 12 months after results are returned and health service use and costs at 12 months and 5 years. A subset of participants and providers will complete qualitative interviews about utility of incidental results. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by Clinical Trials Ontario Streamlined Research Ethics Review System that provides ethical review and oversight for multiple sites participating in the same clinical trial in Ontario.Results from the trial will be shared through stakeholder workshops, national and international conferences, and peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03597165.
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.