Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31804631›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2020

Primary care provider perspectives on using genomic sequencing in the care of healthy children.

Esha Joshi, Chloe Mighton, Marc Clausen, Selina Casalino, Theresa H M Kim, Christine Kowal, Catherine Birken, Jonathon L Maguire, Yvonne Bombard

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Esha JoshiLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Chloe MightonLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Marc ClausenLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Selina CasalinoLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Theresa H M KimLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0691-9072
Christine KowalThe Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Catherine BirkenUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Jonathon L MaguireLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Yvonne BombardLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. yvonne.bombard@utoronto.ca.
St. Michael's Hospital · CAHospital for Sick Children · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome sequencing (GS) studies involving healthy children can advance scientific knowledge of genetic variation. Little research has examined primary care providers' views on using GS in this context. This study explored primary care provider perspectives on the use of GS in research and the care of healthy children. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 16 providers discussing their views on GS research and receiving results. Interviews were analyzed by thematic analysis and constant comparison. Participants were family physicians (11/16) and primary care pediatricians (5/16) in practice for >10 years (11/16). Participants valued GS in healthy children for research purposes; however, opinions diverged on using the results in primary care. Proponents valued using results for surveillance and prevention in healthy children. Skeptics questioned the clinical utility of results and the appropriateness of applying research data in primary care. Both groups shared concerns over opportunistic screening, validity, and interpretation of results, increased health system costs and inequities, and genetic discrimination. Primary care providers were ambivalent about the appropriateness and utility of GS in the care of healthy children. Providers feel unprepared and unsure of their obligations in disclosing these results. Providers do not feel they are equipped with the necessary resources and training to support their patients in using GS results in their care.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultFemaleGenetic TestingHumansMaleMass ScreeningPediatriciansPhenotypePhysicians, Primary CareSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID31804631
PMCPMC7171087
OpenAlexW2992879349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.