ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Incorporating multiracial and multiethnic experiences into genetic counseling practice and research: A necessary opportunity.
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.
- Ancestry-informative markers and variants of uncertain significance on hereditary cancer panels.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Narratives before numbers: Reimagining conversations about race, ethnicity, and ancestry information in genetic counseling practice.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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The conflation of race and genetic ancestry can have harmful consequences. Biological conceptualizations of race have long been used to justify inequities and distract from social structures that afford opportunities to some that are unjustly denied to others. Despite recent efforts within the scientific community to distinguish between the sociopolitical constructs of race and ethnicity and the biological constructs of genetic ancestry and genetic similarity, their conflation continues to influence genomic research and its translation into clinical care. One overlooked aspect of this problematic conflation is the extent to which discrete monoracial and monoethnic categorization systems persist and perpetuate unequal benefit-sharing in the clinical translation of genomic technologies. In genetic service delivery, reliance on discrete racial and ethnic categories undermines the clinical translation of genomic technologies for large segments of the global population. For multiracial and multiethnic individuals, who have complex identities that defy discrete categorization systems, the potential benefits of genomic discoveries are especially elusive. Scholars have recently begun to call for the inclusion of multiracial, multiethnic, and admixed individuals in race, ethnicity, and ancestry frameworks in genetics and genomics. However, little work has been done to explore and address the unique challenges and opportunities posed by multiracial/multiethnic individuals in genetic counseling specifically. We discuss how conceptualizing diversity along discrete racial and ethnic lines perpetuates inequitable patient care and limits efforts to increase inclusion and belonging within genetic counseling. Moreover, we argue that ongoing efforts to mitigate racial inequity must actively challenge the paradigm of monoracial and monoethnic categories to accomplish their goal.
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.