ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Exploring perceptions of genetic counseling student-run free clinics as an innovative service delivery model to increase access to genetic counseling services.
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 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.
- Engaging migrants and immigrants in genetics research.Nature genetics · 2025Review
- Exploring perceptions of genetic counseling student-run free clinics as an innovative service delivery model to increase access to genetic counseling services.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
Abstract
Underrepresented groups lack access to genetics services, heightening health disparities among those who benefit from advancements in precision medicine. An innovative approach to addressing this gap in care and increasing health equity in the context of genetic counseling is student-run free clinics (SRFCs). While only one recently established SRFC for genetic counseling is reported in the literature, SRFCs have a long-standing presence in other health professional schools, such as nursing, pharmacy and physical therapy, and research supports the benefits for patients and students. This qualitative study aims to explore the perspectives of certified genetic counselors (CGCs) and genetic counseling students (GC students) regarding SRFCs as an innovative service delivery model to increase access to genetic counseling services. Semi-structured Zoom interviews were conducted with 10 CGCs and 10 GC students across the United States. Participants were asked open-ended questions about how SRFCs could meet needs of the field, potential challenges in creating and maintaining these clinics, and anticipated outcomes. Through abductive thematic analysis of interview transcripts, three main themes were identified: (1) SRFCs can be mutually beneficial as alignment with profession goals potentially leads to positive outcomes for patients and students; (2) student scope of duties will vary depending on student ability corresponding with their training timeline and level of required supervision; and (3) successful SRFC implementation and sustainability will require thoughtful planning regarding collaboration, infrastructure support, clinic operations, visibility, and protections for vulnerable groups. Participants recognized SRFCs' potential to reduce health disparities by expanding access to genetic counseling for uninsured and underinsured populations. Implementing SRFCs could enhance the quality of GC student training, providing opportunities to apply skills and gain experience working with diverse patient populations. A key subtheme was the need to foster support from the CGC community in transitioning from a traditional supervision model. This research provides a baseline framework from which to further develop and implement SRFCs for genetic counseling.
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.