ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Changes in acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands from 2017 to 2022.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating direct-to-consumer genetic testing: experiences, decisions and perspectives of Dutch users.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of six common types of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Changes in acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of direct-to-consumer genetic tests in the Netherlands from 2017 to 2022.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although the popularity of direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GT) for disease-related purposes increased, concerns persist whether consumers make well-informed decisions about their purchase. To better target pre- and post-test information materials, this study aims to determine the characteristics of people interested in undergoing DTC-GT. In addition, it aims to determine changes in acceptability, consideration, intention, and uptake of DTC-GT since 2017. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted in April 2022 with a representative sample of the Dutch adult population. Ordinal regression models and chi-squared tests were used to determine factors associated with DTC-GT acceptability, consideration and intention, and changes in outcomes since 2017, respectively. Of the 907 included respondents, 19.3% found DTC-GT acceptable, 29.4% considered taking a DTC-GT in the future, 6.2% intended to take a test within the coming year, and 0.9% had already tested. High education was associated with lower acceptability, consideration, intention, and higher awareness. Respondents with a chronic disease were less likely to find DTC-GT acceptable. Higher consideration was associated with having a partner, adopted/stepchildren, and lower age. Compared to 2017, in 2022 more respondents found DTC-GT totally unacceptable, while more considered testing, and fewer ruled out taking a test both in the next year and the future. Education status may play an important role in people's acceptability, consideration, intention, and awareness of disease-related DTC-GT in the Netherlands. Easy-to-understand public information materials should be promoted and guidance is needed to help with decision-making and result interpretation. Future research should focus on the best way to provide responsible guidance.
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.