ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2022
Cardiology clinic patient attitudes toward and potential personal utility of genetic testing: Findings from a unique multiracial clinical sample.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of face validity and core concepts of a novel knowledge scale for inherited heart disease: A pilot study.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- The need for an intersectionality framework in precision medicine research.American journal of human genetics · 2023Article
- Cardiology clinic patient attitudes toward and potential personal utility of genetic testing: Findings from a unique multiracial clinical sample.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As more is understood about the hereditary nature of disease risk, the utility of genetic testing within cardiovascular medicine is increasingly being explored. Although testing may afford more personalized risk stratification, there is a paucity of information regarding patient knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs toward genetic testing among cardiology patients. Participants (n = 530) recruited primarily from a cardiology clinic filled out a 41-item written questionnaire assessing knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes toward genetic testing, motivators and detractors for considering genetic testing, and perceived likelihood for behavior change after hypothetical genetic testing risk stratification. Path analysis was used to test the hypothetical models predicting the likelihood of getting a genetic test and making behavior changes following genetic testing. The patient population was late-middle-aged (59.0 ± 14.5 years), majority women (61.5%), and about half reported having a bachelor's degree. 58.1% of participants self-identified as White, 25.7% as African American or Black, 6.8% as Spanish, Latino, or Hispanic, 3.0% as Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.5% as Native American. Gender (being a woman) and more years of education were related to greater knowledge about genetic testing. Racial identity and years of education were related to beliefs about genetic testing. Beliefs, but not knowledge, were related to more positive attitudes and a higher likelihood of pursuing genetic testing. Positive attitudes were related to greater perceived personal control (PPC). Furthermore, attitudes and PPC were related to higher likelihood of lifestyle change after genetic testing. These results highlight the need to integrate the experiences of racialized communities into education/counseling efforts. Most educational counseling efforts lack a nuanced discussion of social determinants of health or beliefs. In addition to factual information, educational counseling must also address people's beliefs, concerns, and the intersecting experiences and identities, which shape patients' relationships with the evolving landscape of healthcare and personalized medicine.
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.