Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34939014›Full record

ArticleKidney medicine

Genetic Testing for Chronic Kidney Diseases: Clinical Utility and Barriers Perceived by Nephrologists.

Michal Mrug, Michelle S Bloom, Christine Seto, Meenakshi Malhotra, Hossein Tabriziani, Philippe Gauthier, Vicki Sidlow, Trudy McKanna, Paul R Billings

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Structured Application of Genetic Testing in a Pediatric Kidney Clinic.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Kidney medicine · 2025
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Utility of Genetic Testing in Adults with CKD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. The Role of Genetic Testing in Adult CKD.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2024
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michal MrugDepartment of Medicine, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Michelle S BloomNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Christine SetoNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Meenakshi MalhotraNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Hossein TabrizianiNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Philippe GauthierNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Vicki SidlowNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Trudy McKannaNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Paul R BillingsNatera, Inc, San Carlos, California.
Natera (United States) · USBirmingham VA Medical Center · US

Funding

BLRD VA I01 BX004232
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE &

objectiveThe identification of pathogenic variants in genes associated with chronic kidney disease can provide patients and nephrologists with actionable information to guide diagnoses and therapeutic plans. However, many nephrologists do not use genetic testing despite costs decreasing over time and more widespread availability. STUDY

designWe conducted a survey to uncover the perceptions of general adult nephrologists about the utility of and barriers to genetic testing in clinical practice. SETTING &

participantsThe online survey was administered to board-certified nephrologists (n = 10,054) in the United States. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: We analyzed demographic characteristics of the survey respondents and their responses in the context of their use of genetic testing in routine clinical practice.

resultsA total of 149 nephrologists completed the survey, with 72% (107 of 149) reporting genetic test use in their practice. On average, tests were ordered for 3.8% of their patient population. Thirty-five percent of responses from nephrologists without a history of genetic test use ranked perceived barriers as "extremely significant" compared with 23% of responses from those who had previously used genetic tests. However, both users and nonusers of genetic tests indicated high cost (users: 46%, 49 of 107; nonusers 69%, 29 of 42) and poor availability or lack of ease (users: 33%, 35 of 107; nonusers: 57%; 24 of 42) of genetic testing as the most significant perceived barriers to implementation. LIMITATIONS: The survey used in this study was not previously validated; additionally, because of the relatively small number of responses, there might have been a selection bias among the responders.

conclusionsAlthough most nephrologists reported using genetic tests in clinical practice, high costs and poor availability or the lack of ease of use were perceived as the most important barriers to routine adoption. These observations indicate that educational programs that cover a range of topics, from genetics of chronic kidney disease to selection of the test, may help mitigate these barriers and enhance the use of genetic testing in nephrology practice.

Indexed as

diseasedisordersfamilialGenetic testinghereditaryinheritedkidneynext-generation sequencingrenalsurvey

Identifiers

PMID34939014
PMCPMC8664736
OpenAlexW3201709074

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.