ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2020
Valuable Genomes: Taxonomy and Archetypes of Business Models in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.
Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Admixture-informed polygenic risk reporting using the ePRS framework.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Cost Considerations of Direct to Consumer Infertility Testing and Sperm Cryopreservation.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.NEJM evidence · 2025Review
- Behavior Change Support Systems for Self-Treating Procrastination: Systematic Search in App Stores and Analysis of Motivational Design Archetypes.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Business Venturing in Regulated Markets-Taxonomy and Archetypes of Digital Health Business Models in the European Union: Mixed Methods Descriptive and Exploratory Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- The regulatory status of health apps that employ gamification.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Policy Guidance for Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Services: Framework Development Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Review
- Digital entrepreneurship from cellular data: How omics afford the emergence of a new wave of digital ventures in health.Electronic markets · 2023Article
- Drama as a Powerful Tool to Enrich Socio-scientific Argumentation.International journal of science and mathematics education · 2023Article
- Genetic testing-whether to allow complete freedom? Direct to consumer tests versus genetic tests for medical purposes.Journal of applied genetics · 2022Review
- Limiting medical certainties? Funding challenges for German and comparable public healthcare systems due to AI prediction and how to address them.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2022Review
- Archetypes of Gamification: Analysis of mHealth Apps.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2020Article
- Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing on Social Media: Topic Modeling and Sentiment Analysis of YouTube Users' Comments.JMIR infodemiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent progress in genome data collection and analysis technologies has led to a surge of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing services. Owing to the clinical value and sensitivity of genomic data, as well as uncertainty and hearsay surrounding business practices of DTC genetic testing service providers, DTC genetic testing has faced significant criticism by researchers and practitioners. Research in this area has centered on ethical and legal implications of providing genetic tests directly to consumers, but we still lack a more profound understanding of how businesses in the DTC genetic testing markets work and provide value to different stakeholders.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to address the lack of knowledge concerning business models of DTC genetic testing services by systematically identifying the salient properties of various DTC genetic testing service business models as well as discerning dominant business models in the market.
methodsWe employed a 3-phased research approach. In phase 1, we set up a database of 277 DTC genetic testing services. In phase 2, we drew on these data as well as conceptual models of DTC genetic testing services and iteratively developed a taxonomy of DTC genetic testing service business models. In phase 3, we used a 2-stage clustering method to cluster the 277 services that we identified during phase 1 and derived 6 dominant archetypes of DTC genetic testing service business models.
resultsThe contributions of this research are 2-fold. First, we provided a first of its kind, systematically developed taxonomy of DTC genetic testing service business models consisting of 15 dimensions in 4 categories. Each dimension comprises 2 to 5 characteristics and captures relevant aspects of DTC genetic testing service business models. Second, we derived 6 archetypes of DTC genetic testing service business models named as follows: (1) low-cost DTC genomics for enthusiasts, (2) high-privacy DTC genomics for enthusiasts, (3) specific information tests, (4) simple health tests, (5) basic low-value DTC genomics, and (6) comprehensive tests and low data processing.
conclusionsOur analysis paints a much more complex business landscape in the DTC genetic testing market than previously anticipated. This calls for further research on business models and their effects that underlie DTC genetic testing services and invites specific regulatory interventions to protect consumers and level the playing field.
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.