ArticleJournal of human genetics2020
Attitudes toward and current status of disclosure of secondary findings from next-generation sequencing: a nation-wide survey of clinical genetics professionals in Japan.
Article in Journal of human genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The return of individual genomic results to research participants: design and pilot study of Tohoku Medical Megabank Project.Journal of human genetics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The management of secondary findings (SFs), which are beyond the intended purpose of the analysis, from clinical comprehensive genomic analysis using next generation sequencing (NGS) presents challenges. Policy statements regarding their clinical management have been announced in Japan and other countries. In Japan, however, the current status of and attitudes of clinical genetics professionals toward reporting them are unclear. We conducted a questionnaire survey of clinical genetics professionals at two time points (2013 and 2019) to determine the enforcement of the SF management policy in cases of comprehensive genetic analysis of intractable diseases and clinical cancer genome profiling testing. According to the survey findings, 40% and 70% of the respondents stated in the 2013 and 2019 surveys, respectively, that they had an SF policy in the field of intractable diseases, indicating that SF policy awareness in Japan has changed significantly in recent years. Furthermore, a total of 80% of respondents stated that their facility had established a policy for clinical cancer genome profiling testing in the 2019 survey. In both surveys, the policies included the selection criteria for genes to be disclosed and the procedure to return SFs, followed by recommendations and proposals regarding SFs in Japan and other countries. To create a better list of the genes to be disclosed, further examination is needed considering the characteristics of each analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32661284What 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.