ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2023
User Experiences of Pharmacogenomic Testing and Opinions among Psychiatry Patients.
Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors Facilitating Adoption of Pharmacogenetic Testing by Prescribers of Antidepressants in Four US Health Systems: A Multi-Site Cross-Sectional PGx Implementation Science Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Article
- Pharmacogenetic Testing of Children and Adolescents with Mental Health Conditions: Real-World Experiences.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Patient and clinician perspectives on pharmacogenetic testing for antipsychotics.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Scoping review of enablers and challenges of implementing pharmacogenomics testing in the primary care settings.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Article
- Precision medicine decision-making under pharmacogenomics in nursing: realizing value from limited evidence to scaled clinical pathways.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacogenomic testing (PGx) is a tool used to guide physicians in selecting an optimal medication for clients based on their genetic profile. The objective of this qualitative study is to understand patients' experiences with PGx testing as well as their opinions regarding the clinical adoption of such tests in psychiatry. A focus group was conducted to assess the needs of clients who had experience using a PGx test. Participants were recruited from a large study on PGx testing that offered physicians an opportunity to use PGx reports to guide psychotropic prescriptions. The focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed, and coded using NVivo to identify core themes. A total of 11 people participated in the focus group. Our analysis revealed that many participants were in favour of implementing PGx testing in psychiatric practice, and all expressed important considerations for patient-centred optimization of PGx testing. The main themes captured were: education and awareness among clinicians, cost considerations, PGx results-sharing and accessibility, and prospective benefits. The results of this study suggest that patients are keen to see PGx testing in widespread clinical care, but they report important opportunities to improve knowledge mobilization of PGx testing.
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.