ArticleRisk management and insurance review2021
Genetic testing and insurance implications: Surveying the US general population about discrimination concerns and knowledge of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).
Article in Risk management and insurance review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining the Decision to Take a Dementia Risk Test: Considerations for Privacy in Screening At-Home.Dementia and geriatric cognitive disorders · 2026Article
- Health care providers' perceptions of screening for risk of type 1 diabetes in newborns using genetic risk scores.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Advancing Germline Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer in Resource-Restricted Settings: Evidence, Barriers, and a Practical Roadmap for Implementation.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2026Review
- Cardiovascular genetic counselor decision making about discussing life insurance with patients.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Re-consent practices in biobanks in Japan: current status and stakeholder perspectives.Journal of community genetics · 2025Article
- Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency (DPYD) Genotyping-Guided Fluoropyrimidine-Based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer. A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Clinical drug investigation · 2025Article
- Enhancing patient representation learning with inferred family pedigrees improves disease risk prediction.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Principles and Policy Recommendations for Comprehensive Genetic Data Governance.Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society · 2025Article
- Workplace Genomic Testing: What Do Company Websites Say about Federal Privacy and Anti-Discrimination Laws?Public health genomics · 2025Article
- Genomic privacy and security in the era of artificial intelligence and quantum computing.Discover computing · 2025Review
- Genomics and insurance in the United Kingdom: increasing complexity and emerging challenges.Health economics, policy, and law · 2024Article
- Future implications of polygenic risk scores for life insurance underwriting.NPJ genomic medicine · 2024Review
- Ethical and Legal Issues Surrounding Genetic Testing in the NICU.NeoReviews · 2024Article
- Direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the news: a descriptive analysis.Journal of community genetics · 2023Article
- The persistent lack of knowledge and misunderstanding of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) more than a decade after passage.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Globally, due to public concerns of genetic discrimination, some countries and insurance industries have adopted policies restricting insurer use of genetic information, such as the US Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). This study reports on combined analysis of two surveys assessing public knowledge of GINA and concerns of genetic discrimination in a diverse U.S. sample (N=1616). We focus on whether occupation, genetic testing history, and insurance status are correlated with knowledge of GINA or concerns of discrimination. While bivariate analysis identified some populations with higher subjective/objective knowledge and concern relative to counterparts, multivariable regression identified very few significant associations with outcomes of interest. Overall, this study highlights lack of awareness and understanding of GINA, even among subpopulations hypothesized to have greater knowledge of the law. These findings have implications for the broader debate around insurer use of genetic information.
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.