ArticleThe pharmacogenomics journal2024
Understanding general practitioner and pharmacist preferences for pharmacogenetic testing in primary care: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in The pharmacogenomics journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of an open data model for pharmacogenetics to enable semantic interoperability in clinical practice.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular prescriber attitudes to pharmacogenomics: a survey by the ESC working group on cardiovascular pharmacotherapy.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2026Article
- From science to service-overcoming clinical implementation barriers to population genomic screening.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Oncologists' preferences for frontline TKI treatment of Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a discrete choice experiment.Future oncology (London, England) · 2025Article
- Embedding Pharmacogenetics Into Clinical Practice to Improve Patient Outcomes.Annals of human genetics · 2025Review
- Pharmacogenomics in the UK National Health Service: Progress towards implementation.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Review
- Clinician Experiences at the Frontier of Pharmacogenomics and Future Directions.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- Pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing in the acute hospital setting: a cross-sectional study.QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Pharmacogenetic testing in the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS) has historically been reactive in nature, undertaken in the context of single gene-drug relationships in specialist settings. Using a discrete choice experiment we aimed to identify healthcare professional preferences for development of a pharmacogenetic testing service in primary care in the NHS. Respondents, representing two professions groups (general practitioners or pharmacists), completed one of two survey versions, asking them to select their preferred pharmacogenetic testing service in the context of a presentation of low mood or joint pain. Responses from 235 individuals were included. All respondents preferred pharmacogenetic testing over no testing, though preference heterogeneity was identified. Both professional groups, but especially GPs, were highly sensitive to service design, with uptake varying depending on the service offered. This study demonstrates uptake of a pharmacogenetic testing service is impacted by service design and highlights key areas which should be prioritised within future initiatives.
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.