ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2022
Lessons Learned from the Pilot Phase of a Population-Wide Genomic Screening Program: Building the Base to Reach a Diverse Cohort of 100,000 Participants.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Understanding Barriers and Motivators of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Genetic Testing: Insights From the Singapore Public.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- FH Genetic Testing in Preventive Cardiology: Unpacking Challenges and Enablers Beyond Cost.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Uptake of Genetic and Cascade Testing in Familial Hypercholesterolemia: a Systematic Review.International journal of behavioral medicine · 2026Article
- North Carolina primary care provider perspectives on expanded genomic screening in children.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Primary Care Provider Perspectives on Expanded Genomic Screening in Children.Research square · 2025Article
- Developing and sustaining inclusive language in biomedical informatics communications: an AMIA Board of Directors endorsed paper on the Inclusive Language and Context Style Guidelines.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2025Article
- Underrepresented populations in genomic research: a qualitative study of researchers' perspectives.BMC medical genomics · 2025Article
- Women's preferences for genetic screening in routine care: A qualitative study.Patient education and counseling · 2025Article
- Using implementation science to evaluate a population-wide genomic screening program: Findings from the first 20,000 In Our DNA SC participants.American journal of human genetics · 2024Article
- Measuring Costs of Cardiovascular Disease Prevention for Patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia in Administrative Claims Data.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2024Article
- Extending an Antiracism Lens to the Implementation of Precision Public Health Interventions.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- Anticipating adaptation: tracking the impact of planned and unplanned adaptations during the implementation of a complex population-based genomic screening program.Translational behavioral medicine · 2023Article
- HerediGene Population Study IT infrastructure: A model to support genomic research recruitment and precision public health.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Genomic information is increasingly relevant for disease prevention and risk management at the individual and population levels. Screening healthy adults for Tier 1 conditions of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia using a population-based approach can help identify the 1−2% of the US population at increased risk of developing diseases associated with these conditions and tailor prevention strategies. Our objective is to report findings from an implementation science study that evaluates multi-level facilitators and barriers to implementation of the In Our DNA SC population-wide genomic screening initiative. Methods: We established an IMPACTeam (IMPlementAtion sCience for In Our DNA SC Team) to evaluate the pilot phase using principles of implementation science. We used a parallel convergent mixed methods approach to assess the Reach, Implementation, and Effectiveness outcomes from the RE-AIM implementation science framework during the pilot phase of In Our DNA SC. Quantitative assessment included the examination of frequencies and response rates across demographic categories using chi-square tests. Qualitative data were audio-recorded and transcribed, with codes developed by the study team based on the semi-structured interview guide. Results: The pilot phase (8 November 2021, to 7 March 2022) included recruitment from ten clinics throughout South Carolina. Reach indicators included enrollment rate and representativeness. A total of 23,269 potential participants were contacted via Epic’s MyChart patient portal with 1976 (8.49%) enrolled. Black individuals were the least likely to view the program invitation (28.9%) and take study-related action. As a result, there were significantly higher enrollment rates among White (10.5%) participants than Asian (8.71%) and Black (3.46%) individuals (p < 0.0001). Common concerns limiting reach and participation included privacy and security of results and the impact participation would have on health or life insurance. Facilitators included family or personal history of a Tier 1 condition, prior involvement in genetic testing, self-interest, and altruism. Assessment of implementation (i.e., adherence to protocols/fidelity to protocols) included sample collection rate (n = 1104, 55.9%) and proportion of samples needing recollection (n = 19, 1.7%). There were no significant differences in sample collection based on demographic characteristics. Implementation facilitators included efficient collection processes and enthusiastic clinical staff. Finally, we assessed the effectiveness of the program, finding low dropout rates (n = 7, 0.35%), the identification of eight individuals with Tier 1 conditions (0.72% positive), and high rates of follow-up genetic counseling (87.5% completion). Conclusion: Overall, Asian and Black individuals were less engaged, with few taking any study-related actions. Strategies to identify barriers and promoters for the engagement of diverse populations are needed to support participation. Once enrolled, individuals had high rates of completing the study and follow-up engagement with genetic counselors. Findings from the pilot phase of In Our DNA SC offer opportunities for improvement as we expand the program and can provide guidance to organizations seeking to begin efforts to integrate population-wide genomic screening.
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.