Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34843533›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: Prospective users' attitudes toward information about ancestry and biological relationships.

James W Hazel, Catherine Hammack-Aviran, Kathleen M Brelsford, Bradley A Malin, Laura M Beskow, Ellen Wright Clayton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
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

6 authors.

James W HazelCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9264-0897
Catherine Hammack-AviranCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Kathleen M BrelsfordCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Bradley A MalinCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Laura M BeskowCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.
Ellen Wright ClaytonCenter for Biomedical Ethics and Society, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.

Funding

Genetic Privacy and Identity in Community Settings - GetPreCiSeRM1HG009034 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CLAYTON, ELLEN WRIGHT, MALIN, BRADLEY A. · 2016 to 2024
$8.3M
NHGRI NIH HHS RM1 HG009034
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is marketed as a tool to uncover ancestry and kin. Recent studies of actual and potential users have demonstrated that individuals' responses to the use of these tests for these purposes are complex, with privacy, disruptive consequences, potential for misuse, and secondary use by law enforcement cited as potential concerns. We conducted six focus groups with a diverse sample of participants (n = 62) who were aware of but had not used direct-to-consumer genetic tests, in an effort to understand more about what people considering these tests think about the potential value, risks, and benefits of such testing, taking into account use by third parties, such as potential kin and law enforcement. Participants differed widely in the perceived value of direct-to-consumer genetic tests for ancestry and kinship information for their own lives, including the desirability of contact with previously unknown relatives. Some perceived ancestry testing as mere curiosity or entertainment, while others, particularly those who had gaps in their family history, few living relatives, or who were adopted, saw greater value. Concerns about intrusion into one's life by purported kin and control of data were widespread, with many participants expressing concern about secondary uses of data that could harm users or their families. The use of direct-to-consumer genetic tests data for forensic genealogy elicited a particularly wide array of reactions, both spontaneously and in response to specific discussion prompts, mirroring the current public debate about law enforcement access to such data. The themes uncovered through our investigation warrant specific attention in the continued development of the science, policy, and practice of commercial direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Indexed as

Direct-To-Consumer Screening and TestingGenetic TestingAdultAgedExploratory BehaviorFamilyFemaleFocus GroupsHumansLaw EnforcementMaleMiddle AgedPrivacyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34843533
PMCPMC8629298

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.