Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37198378›Full record

ReviewJournal of community genetics2023

Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review.

Norina Gasteiger, Amy Vercell, Naz Khan, Dawn Dowding, Angela C Davies, Alan Davies

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of community genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Testing a Population-Based Outreach Intervention for Ovarian Cancer Survivors to Encourage their Close Relatives to Consider Genetic Counseling.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2024
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Norina GasteigerDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7801-7417
Amy VercellDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4121-6524
Naz KhanGenomic Medicine, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK.
Dawn DowdingDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5672-8605
Angela C DaviesDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3365-7231
Alan DaviesDivision of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK. alan.davies-2@manchester.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5737-5629
Manchester Academic Health Science Centre · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient-facing digital technologies may reduce barriers to and alleviate the burden on genetics services. However, no work has synthesised the evidence for patient-facing digital interventions for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement more broadly. It is also unclear which groups have been engaged by digital interventions.

aimThis systematic review explores which existing patient-facing digital technologies have been used for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement, and for whom and for which purposes the interventions have been developed.

methodsThe review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight databases were searched for literature. Information was extracted into an Excel sheet and analysed in a narrative manner. Quality assessments were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

resultsTwenty-four studies were included, of which 21 were moderate or high quality. The majority (88%) were conducted in the United States of America or within a clinical setting (79%). More than half (63%) of the interventions were web-based tools, and almost all focussed on educating users (92%). There were promising results regarding educating patients and their families and facilitating engagement with genetics services. Few of the studies focussed on empowering patients or were community-based.

conclusionDigital interventions may be used to deliver information about genetics concepts and conditions, and positively impact service engagement. However, there is insufficient evidence related to empowering patients and engaging underserved communities or consanguineous couples. Future work should focus on co-developing content with end users and incorporating interactive features.

Indexed as

Digital healthDigital technologyGenetic counsellingGenetics educationGenetic servicesHuman genetics

Identifiers

PMID37198378
PMCPMC10271952
OpenAlexW4377011143

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.