Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36046768›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part A2021

Returning negative results from large-scale genomic screening: Experiences from the eMERGE III network.

Kelsey Stuttgen Finn, John Lynch, Sharon Aufox, Harris T. Bland, Wendy Chung, Colin Halverson, Scott Hebbring, Christin Hoell, Ingrid Holm, Gail Jarvik and 11 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of medical genetics. Part A, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The reckoning: The return of genomic results to 1444 participants across the eMERGE3 Network.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2022
    Article
  6. 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

21 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.

Kelsey Stuttgen FinnBiomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.ORCID 0000-0002-2513-3139
John LynchDepartment of Communication, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Sharon AufoxCenter for Genomic Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Harris T. BlandDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Wendy ChungDepartment of Pediatrics, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Colin HalversonSchool of Medicine, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis, Indiana.ORCID 0000-0002-4205-7860
Scott HebbringCenter for Human Genetics, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, Wisconsin.
Christin HoellCenter for Genomic Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Ingrid HolmDepartment of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Gail JarvikDivision of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Iftikhar KulloDepartment of Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.ORCID 0000-0002-6524-3471
Kathleen LeppigGenetic Services, Kaiser Permanente of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Melanie MyersCollege of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.ORCID 0000-0002-6845-5226
Cynthia ProwsDepartment of Pediatrics, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Hila Milo RasoulyDepartment of Medicine, Division of Nephrology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York.
Rajbir SinghDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Tennessee.
Georgia WeisnerDepartment of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee.
Janet WilliamsGeisinger Genomic Medicine Institute, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Julia WynnDepartment of Pediatrics, Columbia University, New York, New York.
Maureen SmithDepartment of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.
Richard SharpBiomedical Ethics Research Program, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.ORCID 0000-0001-5441-2084
Mayo Clinic · USNorthwestern University · USCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center · USColumbia University · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · USBoston Children's Hospital · USCenter for Human Genetics · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USGeisinger Neuroscience Institute · USKaiser Permanente · USMeharry Medical College · USUniversity of Cincinnati · USUniversity of Indianapolis · USUniversity of Washington Medical Center · US

Funding

Genomic Basis of Susceptibility to COVID-19 Infection and its ComplicationsU01HG006379 · NHGRI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Richard R. Sharp · 2011 to 2026
$16.5M
Finding Genomic Profiles of COVID-19 Phenotypes from the EHRU01HG008685 · NHGRI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ELIZABETH W KARLSON, Matthew S Lebo · 2015 to 2026
$13.6M
Variation, Function, and Disease Supplement ProgramU01HG008657 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI David Russell Crosslin, Gail Pairitz Jarvik · 2015 to 2026
$13.4M
OMOP information model for eMERGE phenotypingU01HG008680 · NHGRI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI Wendy K Chung, GEORGE M HRIPCSAK · 2015 to 2026
$13.3M
Polygenic Risk Scores for Healthier African American FamiliesU01HG011172 · NHGRI · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI Leah Claire Kottyan, LISA J MARTIN · 2020 to 2026
$7.2M
The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network Phase III Coordinating Center (U01)U01HG008701 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI PETERSON, JOSEPH F. · 2015 to 2019
$7.1M
VGER, the Vanderbilt Genome-Electronic Records ProjectU01HG008672 · NHGRI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI DENNY, JOSHUA C., RODEN, DAN M · 2015 to 2019
$5.1M
The Future of Genomics Medicine in Patient Care: Contributions from CHOPU01HG008684 · NHGRI · CHILDREN'S HOSP OF PHILADELPHIA · PI HAKONARSON, HAKON · 2015 to 2019
$5.0M
OMOP information model for eMERGE phenotypingU01HG008679 · NHGRI · GEISINGER CLINIC · PI WILLIAMS, MARC S. · 2015 to 2019
$4.4M
Better Outcomes for Children: Promoting Excellence in Healthcare Genomics to Inform PolicyU01HG008666 · NHGRI · CINCINNATI CHILDRENS HOSP MED CTR · PI HARLEY, JOHN BARKER · 2015 to 2019
$4.2M
Genomic Medicine at Northwestern: Discovery and ImplementationU01HG008673 · NHGRI · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI CHISHOLM, REX L, SMITH, MAUREEN E · 2015 to 2019
$4.1M
NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006379NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008657NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008666NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008672NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008673NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008679NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008680NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008684NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008685NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG008701NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG011172
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population-based genomic screening has the potential to improve health outcomes by identifying genetic causes of disease before they occur. While much attention has been paid to supporting the needs of the small percentage of patients who will receive a life-altering positive genomic screening result that requires medical attention, little attention has been given to the communication of negative screening results. As there are currently no best practices for returning negative genomic screening results, we drew on experiences across the electronic medical records and genomics (eMERGE) III Network to highlight the diversity of reporting methods employed, challenges encountered in reporting negative test results, and "lessons learned" across institutions. A 60-item survey that consisted of both multiple choice and open-ended questions was created to gather data across institutions. Even though institutions independently developed procedures for reporting negative results, and had very different study populations, we identified several similarities of approach, including but not limited to: returning results by mail, placing results in the electronic health record via an automated process, reporting results to participants' primary care provider, and providing genetic counseling to interested patients at no cost. Differences in procedures for reporting negative results included: differences in terminology used to describe negative results, definitions of negative results, guidance regarding the meaning of negative results for participants and their family members, and recommendations for clinical follow up. Our findings highlight emerging practices for reporting negative genomic screening results and highlight the need to create patient education and clinical support tools for reporting negative screening results.

Indexed as

genomic screeningnegative resultsreturn of results

Identifiers

PMID36046768
PMCPMC9426643
OpenAlexW3110668378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.