Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38959884›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2024

Ensuring best practice in genomics education: A scoping review of genomics education needs assessments and evaluations.

Amy Nisselle, Bronwyn Terrill, Monika Janinski, Sylvia Metcalfe, Clara Gaff

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
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

5 authors.

Amy NisselleAustralian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: amy.nisselle@mcri.edu.au.
Bronwyn TerrillAustralian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Monika JaninskiAustralian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Sylvia MetcalfeAustralian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Clara GaffAustralian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A health workforce capable of implementing genomic medicine requires effective genomics education. Genomics education interventions developed for health professions over the last two decades, and their impact, are variably described in the literature. To inform an evaluation framework for genomics education, we undertook an exploratory scoping review of published needs assessments for, and/or evaluations of, genomics education interventions for health professionals from 2000 to 2023. We retrieved and screened 4,659 records across the two searches with 363 being selected for full-text review and consideration by an interdisciplinary working group. 104 articles were selected for inclusion in the review-60 needs assessments, 52 genomics education evaluations, and eight describing both. Included articles spanned all years and described education interventions in over 30 countries. Target audiences included medical specialists, nurses/midwives, and/or allied health professionals. Evaluation questions, outcomes, and measures were extracted, categorized, and tabulated to iteratively compare measures across stages of genomics education evaluation: planning (pre-implementation), development and delivery (implementation), and impact (immediate, intermediate, or long-term outcomes). They are presented here along with descriptions of study designs. We document the wide variability in evaluation approaches and terminology used to define measures and note that few articles considered downstream (long-term) outcomes of genomics education interventions. Alongside the evaluation framework for genomics education, results from this scoping review form part of a toolkit to help educators to undertake rigorous genomics evaluation that is fit for purpose and can contribute to the growing evidence base of the contribution of genomics education in implementation strategies for genomic medicine.

Indexed as

GenomicsNeeds AssessmentHealth PersonnelHumanscontinuing medical educationcontinuing professional developmentevaluationgenomic medicinescoping reviewworkforce development

Identifiers

PMID38959884
PMCPMC11339611

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.