Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37752309›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2024

Risk perception and intended behavior change after uninformative genetic results for adult-onset hereditary conditions in unselected patients.

Nandana D Rao, Kristine M King, Jailanie Kaganovsky, Sajida Hassan, Darwin Tsinajinne, Stephanie M Fullerton, Annie T Chen, David L Veenstra, Brian H Shirts

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Managing genetic information sharing at family and population level.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nandana D RaoInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8078-0999
Kristine M KingInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jailanie KaganovskyDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0009-0000-3966-5673
Sajida HassanDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Darwin TsinajinneDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Stephanie M FullertonDepartment of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0938-6048
Annie T ChenDepartment of Biomedical Informatics and Medical Education, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3070-8336
David L VeenstraThe Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy & Economics (CHOICE) Institute, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Brian H ShirtsInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. shirtsb@uw.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-7188-6764
University of Washington · USUniversity of Washington Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population genetic screening for preventable adult-onset hereditary conditions may improve disease management and morbidity but most individuals will receive uninformative results that do not indicate higher risk for disease. Investigation into subsequent psychosocial health and behaviors is necessary to inform population screening feasibility, effectiveness, and cost considerations. We conducted a prospective survey study of unselected University of Washington Medicine patients enrolled in a genetic research study screening for pathogenic variation in medically important genes. Survey questions adapted from the Feelings About genomiC Testing Results (FACToR) questionnaire and designed to understand perceived disease risk change and planned health behaviors were administered after receipt of results. Overall, 2761 people received uninformative results and 1352 (49%) completed survey items. Respondents averaged 41 years old, 62% were female, and 56% were Non-Hispanic Asian. Results from the FACToR instrument showed mean (SD) scores of 0.92 (1.34), 7.63 (3.95), 1.65 (2.23), and 0.77 (1.50) for negative emotions, positive emotions, uncertainty, and privacy concerns, respectively, suggesting minimal psychosocial harms from genetic screening. Overall, 12.2% and 9.6% of survey respondents believed that their risk of cancer or heart disease, respectively, had changed after receiving their uninformative genetic screening results. Further, 8.5% of respondents planned to make healthcare changes and 9.1% other behavior changes. Future work is needed to assess observed behavior changes attributable to uninformative screening results and if small changes in behavior among this population have large downstream impacts.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingStress, PsychologicalAdultFemaleHumansMalePerceptionProspective StudiesUncertainty

Identifiers

PMID37752309
PMCPMC10772064
OpenAlexW4387055521

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.