ArticleJournal of community genetics2024
Genetic testing perspectives in Pakistani population: a survey on knowledge, attitudes, awareness, and concerns.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Negotiating genetic risk in Indonesia: Development and psychometric evaluation of the knowledge and attitude toward consanguineous marriage instrument in a mixed-methods cross-sectional study.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Assessing awareness toward genetic testing among patients with inherited retinal dystrophy in Japan.Japanese journal of ophthalmology · 2026Article
- Barriers To Genetic Testing Adoption in Oncology: A Cross-Sectional Survey from Pakistan.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- Quality education as a cornerstone of community genetics.Journal of community genetics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A higher rate of consanguineous marriages is associated with the increasing prevalence of genetic disorders, imposing a significant burden on families, public health, and healthcare systems. Genetic testing facilitates the earlier detection of disease and personalized treatment approaches. Therefore, this study aims to assess knowledge, awareness, attitudes, and concerns regarding genetic testing in the Pakistani population. Participants (n = 494) were asked about factors that influence attitudes toward undergoing genetic testing. Furthermore, the study also investigates the concerns and reservations held by the Pakistani population regarding genetic testing. Participants indicated that consanguineous marriages lead to an increased risk of hereditary disorders and agreed that knowledge of genetic diseases can improve the quality of life. Almost 80% of the respondents know the term, and the majority of them know about genetic testing. 87.7% of respondents agreed to genetic screening before marriage, and 39.9% were willing to undergo genetic testing. More knowledge was significantly associated with a higher likelihood of accepting genetic testing, indicating potential acceptance if integrated into standard procedures. Those with a family history of genetic disorders were more positive in accepting genetic testing. The level of understanding regarding genetic testing also influences the concerns. Cultural or religious beliefs may also affect the decision to accept genetic testing. The survey reveals diverse opinions and knowledge levels regarding genetic testing in Pakistan. While there was generally positive interest, concerns about privacy, accuracy, and cultural factors should be addressed. Education and awareness campaigns could help improve understanding and acceptance.
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.