ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2021
Definition of Personalized Medicine and Targeted Therapies: Does Medical Familiarity Matter?
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacological Approaches and Innovative Strategies for Individualized Patient Care.Recent patents on biotechnology · 2026Review
- Epigenetic and Mitochondrial Metabolic Dysfunction in Multiple Sclerosis: A Review of Herbal Drug Approaches and Current Clinical Trials.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Review
- ERK1/2 Signaling in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: From Preclinical Advances to Therapeutic Strategies.Biology · 2025Review
- Review
- Bridging the Divide: A Review on the Implementation of Personalized Cancer Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- In Silico Clinical Trials: Is It Possible?Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Personalised Medicine across Europe.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Psychological tendencies of children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.Scandinavian journal of psychology · 2022Article
- Article
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
Abstract
Personalized medicine (PM) is increasingly becoming a topic of discussion in public health policies and media. However, there is no consensus among definitions of PM in the scientific literature and the terms used to designate it, with some definitions emphasizing patient-centered aspects and others emphasizing biomedical aspects. Furthermore, terms used to refer to PM (e.g., "pharmacogenomics" or, more often, "targeted therapies") are diverse and differently used. To our knowledge, no study has apprehended the differences of definition and attitudes toward personalized medicine and targeted therapies according to level of familiarity with the medical field. Our cohort included 349 French students from three different academic fields, which modulated their familiarity level with the medical field. They were asked to associate words either to "personalized medicine" or "target therapies". Then, they were asked to give an emotional valence to their associations. Results showed that nonfamiliar students perceived PM as more positive than targeted therapies (TT), whereas familiar students showed no difference. Only familiar students defined PM and TT with technical aspects such as genetics or immunology. Further studies are needed in the field in order to determine which other factors could influence the definitions of PM and TT and determine how these definitions could have an impact in a clinical setting.
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.