ArticleJournal of community genetics2024
Patient experiences in receiving telegenetics care for inherited cardiovascular diseases.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessing genetic counseling efficiency with natural language processing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Telegenetics played an important role in providing genetic services to patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, at our institution, it enabled us to expand our genetic counseling and testing services to non-local family members of patients outside of our prior catchment area. However, as telegenetics continues to be utilized even as social distancing is no longer required, further information is needed regarding the impact of this modality on patient experience within cardiogenetics. This study qualitatively explored the experiences of 12 genotype positive individuals who underwent genetic counseling and testing via telegenetics during the first 22 months of the COVID-19 pandemic and compared the experiences of local vs. non-local patients. Both local and non-local participants discussed similar benefits and drawbacks to the use of technology in telegenetics and overall found the use of telegenetics and at-home genetic testing to be convenient. Both groups also noted having to make changes in their daily lives and future planning as a consequence of the positive genetic testing results. However, access to follow-up care differed between local and non-local participants, with more local participants having scheduled and attended appointments with the appropriate medical providers compared to non-local participants. Supplying non-local patients access to remote cardiogenetic testing may therefore require careful consideration in how to ensure proper follow-up care for genotype positive patients and may necessitate the involvement of national professional or patient-centered organizations to help streamline the referral process.
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.