Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39462497›Full record

ArticlePublic health genomics2024

The Biggest Struggle: Navigating Trust and Uncertainty in Genetic Variant Interpretation.

Zachary Griffen, Dina M Asfaha, Kellie Owens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health genomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zachary GriffenDivision of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.
Dina M AsfahaDepartment of Anthropology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
Kellie OwensDivision of Medical Ethics, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.

Funding

Conceptualizing Actionability in Clinical Genomic ScreeningR00HG010905 · NHGRI · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI OWENS, KELLIE NICOLE · 2022 to 2024
$727k
Conceptualizing Actionability in Clinical Genomic ScreeningK99HG010905 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI OWENS, KELLIE NICOLE · 2020 to 2021
$207k
NHGRI NIH HHS K99 HG010905NHGRI NIH HHS R00 HG010905
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAs the utility of genomic sequencing increases, its use in healthcare will continue to expand beyond expert clinics toward nonspecialist practices such as primary care. At the same time, discordance in genetic variant identification and classification between laboratories remains a concern for the field. This research assesses how clinicians with and without genetics expertise understand and trust genetic test results, underscoring how variation in the handling of genetic test results can have real impact on patient care.

methodsWe conducted 40 interviews with genetics experts, including clinical geneticists and genetic counselors, and nonexpert clinicians including primary care providers and cardiologists.

resultsClinical geneticists and genetic counselors reported spending significant time assessing the validity of results from genetic testing laboratories, conversing with laboratories about those results, and potentially reinterpreting results. Conversely, primary care providers and cardiologists without specific genetics expertise reported high levels of trust in laboratory accuracy and variant interpretation, and did not reassess results.

conclusionWe find significant variation in how genetics experts and nonexperts understand the trustworthiness of genetic laboratory reports. This variation could lead to differences in patient care between clinical settings and requires additional guidance for clinicians regarding the handling of genetic test results.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingGenetic VariationTrustFemaleGenetic CounselingHumansMaleUncertaintyGenomic sequencingUncertaintyVariant interpretation

Identifiers

PMID39462497
PMCPMC11588501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.