ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2021
Behavioral and psychological impact of genome sequencing: a pilot randomized trial of primary care and cardiology patients.
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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Psychosocial Impact of Receiving Whole Genome and Whole Exome Sequencing Results in Adults: A Systematic Review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Pooled it
- Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Genetic risk disclosure and behavioural change: not so fast.European journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Opportunistic genomic screening has clinical utility: An interventional cohort study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2025Article
- Promise and Peril of a Genotype-First Approach to Mendelian Cardiovascular Disease.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Review
- Return of Results in Genomic Research Using Large-Scale or Whole Genome Sequencing: Toward a New Normal.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2023Review
- Patient and Clinician Perceptions of Precision Cardiology Care: Findings From the HeartCare Study.Circulation. Genomic and precision medicine · 2022Article
- Patient and provider perspectives on polygenic risk scores: implications for clinical reporting and utilization.Genome medicine · 2022Article
- Pharmacogenetics of Cardiovascular Prevention in Diabetes: From Precision Medicine to Identification of Novel Targets.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Many expect genome sequencing (GS) to become routine in patient care and preventive medicine, but uncertainties remain about its ability to motivate participants to improve health behaviors and the psychological impact of disclosing results. In a pilot trial with exploratory analyses, we randomized 100 apparently healthy, primary-care participants and 100 cardiology participants to receive a review of their family histories of disease, either alone or in addition to GS analyses. GS results included polygenic risk information for eight cardiometabolic conditions. Overall, no differences were observed between the percentage of participants in the GS and control arms, who reported changes to health behaviors such as diet and exercise at 6 months post disclosure (48% vs. 36%, respectively, p = 0.104). In the GS arm, however, the odds of reporting a behavior change increased by 52% per high-risk polygenic prediction (p = 0.032). Mean anxiety and depression scores for GS and control arms had confidence intervals within equivalence margins of ±1.5. Mediation analyses suggested an indirect impact of GS on health behaviors by causing positive psychological responses (p ≤ 0.001). Findings suggest that GS did not distress participants. Future research on GS in more diverse populations is needed to confirm that it does not raise risks for psychological harms and to confirm the ability of polygenic risk predictions to motivate preventive behaviors.
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.