ArticleBMJ open2024
Scoping review of enablers and challenges of implementing pharmacogenomics testing in the primary care settings.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Building capacity for genomics in primary care: a scoping review of practitioner attitudes, education needs, and enablers.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Sex-specific physical activity thresholds influencing muscle function in older adults with XX genotype of ACTN3 R577X.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Pharmacogenomics and Epigenetic Regulation Transforming Pediatric Precision Therapeutics.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Pharmacogenetics of Pharmacists in the Netherlands: A National Online Survey Study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing in Italy: a review of evidence and multidisciplinary consensus on key priorities for implementation.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Genomics in Health and Biomedicine.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Implementing Genomic Medicine in a Federally Qualified Health Center: Assessing Readiness through a Mixed-Methods Approach.Public health genomics · 2026Article
- Article
- Strategic insights into pharmacogenomics coverage: a theory-informed SWOT analysis of UAE insurance stakeholders' perspectives.Human genomics · 2025Article
- Impact and Enablers of Pharmacogenetic-Informed Treatment Decisions-A Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Study Exploring the Patient Perspective.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Targeting radiotherapy-induced inflammation in cancer metastasis: insights into immune modulation, therapeutic opportunities and radiogenomics.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Exploring perceived barriers and attitudes in young adults towards antidepressant pharmacotherapy, including the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing to optimize prescription practices.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Pharmacogenomics and rare diseases: optimizing drug development and personalized therapeutics.PharmacogenomicsArticle
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
introductionPharmacogenomic testing (PGx) plays a crucial role in improving patient medication safety, yet ethical concerns and limitations impede its clinical implementation in the primary care settings.
aimsTo systematically review the current state of PGx in the primary care settings and determine the enablers and challenges of its implementation.
designA scoping review was carried out by adhering to Arksey and O'Malley's 6-stage methodological framework and the 2020 Joanna Briggs Institute and Levac ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All peer-reviewed studies in English, reporting the enablers and the challenges of implementing PGx in the primary care settings were included. DATE EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted the data. Information was synthesised based on the reported enablers and the challenges of implementing PGx testing in the primary care settings. Information was then presented to stakeholders for their inputs.
results78 studies discussing the implementation of PGx testing are included, of which 57% were published between 2019 and 2023. 68% of the studies discussed PGx testing in the primary care setting as a disease-specific themes. Healthcare professionals were the major stakeholders, with primary care physicians (55%) being the most represented. Enablers encompassed various advantages such as diagnostic and therapeutic benefits, cost reduction and the empowerment of healthcare professionals. Challenges included the absence of sufficient scientific evidence, insufficient training for healthcare professionals, ethical and legal aspects of PGx data, low patient awareness and acceptance and the high costs linked to PGx testing.
conclusionPGx testing integration in primary care requires increased consumer awareness, comprehensive healthcare provider training on legal and ethical aspects and global feasibility studies to better understand its implementation challenges. Managing high costs entails streamlining processes, advocating for reimbursement policies and investing in research on innovation and affordability research to improve life expectancy.
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.