Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33510162›Full record

ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2021

Learning from scaling up ultra-rapid genomic testing for critically ill children to a national level.

Stephanie Best, Helen Brown, Sebastian Lunke, Chirag Patel, Jason Pinner, Christopher P Barnett, Meredith Wilson, Sarah A Sandaradura, Belinda McClaren, Gemma R Brett and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Quality improvement initiative to optimize use of rapid genomic sequencing in a level IV NICU.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Genomic medicine in neonatal care: progress and challenges.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023
    Review
  14. Role of genomic medicine and implementing equitable access for critically ill infants in neonatal intensive care units.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2023
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors.

Stephanie BestAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. stephanie.best@mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1107-8976
Helen BrownFaculty of Health Science, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Sebastian LunkeVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Chirag PatelGenetic Health Queensland, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Jason PinnerSydney Children's Hospitals Network - Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Christopher P BarnettPaediatric and Reproductive Genetics Unit, South Australian Clinical Genetics Service, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
Meredith WilsonSydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2305-2033
Sarah A SandaraduraSydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Belinda McClarenAustralian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Gemma R BrettVictorian Clinical Genetics Services, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0133-7994
Jeffrey BraithwaiteAustralian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Zornitza StarkAustralian Genomics, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8640-1371

Funding

Department of Health | National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) GNT111353
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In scaling up an ultra-rapid genomics program, we used implementation science principles to design and investigate influences on implementation and identify strategies required for sustainable "real-world" services. Interviews with key professionals revealed the importance of networks and relationship building, leadership, culture, and the relative advantage afforded by ultra-rapid genomics in the care of critically ill children. Although clinical geneticists focused on intervention characteristics and the fit with patient-centered care, intensivists emphasized the importance of access to knowledge, in particular from clinical geneticists. The relative advantage of ultra-rapid genomics and trust in consistent and transparent delivery were significant in creating engagement at initial implementation, with appropriate resourcing highlighted as important for longer term sustainability of implementation. Our findings demonstrate where common approaches can be used and, significantly, where there is a need to tailor support by professional role and implementation phase, to maximize the potential of ultra-rapid genomic testing to improve patient care.

Identifiers

PMID33510162
PMCPMC7843635

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.