ReviewJournal of genetic counseling2025
Narrative review on ethical and psychological issues raised by genetic and genomic testing in pediatric oncology care.
Review 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Narrative review on ethical and psychological issues raised by genetic and genomic testing in pediatric oncology care.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Review
- Psychological and ethical issues raised by genomic in paediatric care pathway, a qualitative analysis with parents and childhood cancer patients.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
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
Abstract
In pediatric oncology, genetic and genomic tests are proposed throughout the care pathway for many reasons (e.g., cancer characterization, identification of the most appropriate treatment, patient selection for clinical trials, identification of tissue/organ donors, or risk of relapse prediction). Despite the many different approaches (somatic or germline testing, targeted gene or genome sequencing), the implicated individuals are confronted with situations that may intersect and that are interesting to compare. No study has identified and analyzed the available works on these new practices in pediatric oncology. The aim of this narrative literature review was to describe the ethical and psychological perspectives of children with cancer, parents, and healthcare professionals when genetic or genomic testing is proposed as part of the cancer management. Eighteen articles met the inclusion criteria and were comprehensively coded using MAXQDA. Their analysis showed that concerning the subjective implications of genetic and genomic testing, the areas of ambivalence (desire of treatment, desire for knowledge, uncertainty, and guilt) reported by patients and their parents seem to mirror the healthcare professionals' concerns. The ethical and psychological issues about predisposition testing, long discussed in the context of hereditary retinoblastoma and Li-Fraumeni syndrome, represent a useful starting point for a wider discussion of a genetic and genomic testing pathway in pediatric oncology more broadly.
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.