ArticleJournal of community genetics2021
Demographic and socioeconomic trends in DNA banking utilization in the USA.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2021. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Variation among DNA banking consent forms: points for clinicians to bank on.Journal of community 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Demographic and clinical information from de-identified individuals utilizing a single DNA banking service over a 22-year period was assessed using descriptive statistics. The socioeconomic characteristics of the study population were estimated using a zip code-level analysis of US Census data and compared to national US Metrics for 2016. Samples from 4,874 individuals were deposited to a single commercial DNA bank from 1997 to 2019. Samples originated from 31 countries across 6 continents, with the majority of samples originating from the United States (US; 97.37%; n = 4,746). A higher proportion of individuals identifying as females (55.58%; n = 2,709) utilized the service compared to males (41.18%; n = 2,007). The age distribution was bimodal, peaking around 5 years of age and again around 65 years of age. Whole blood was the preferred specimen for submission. Sample deposits peaked in 2015 with 559 annual deposits. Clinical genetic counselors were the most common referral source (41.73%; n = 2,034). Individuals utilizing DNA banking services are estimated to reside in wealthier, more educated and less racially diverse zip codes compared to national metrics. Although direct to consumer DNA banking is being utilized by the general public and clinical genetic counselors in the US, it is not widespread.
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.