ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Training for the future of the genetic counseling profession: Exploring the assessment and adaptation of graduate programs' didactic curriculum.
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 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.
- Teaching Cell and Gene Therapy in Genetic Counseling Programs: Survey Findings and Suggested Practical Resources for Integration.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Still Becoming: Global Reflections on the Future of the Genetic Counseling Profession.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Developing global consensus about core knowledge and skills for genetic counselor education.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Training for the future of the genetic counseling profession: Exploring the assessment and adaptation of graduate programs' didactic curriculum.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
Since the first genetic counseling program (GCP) was established in 1969, there has been a proliferation of growth and demand for genetic counselors. Advances in technology, affordable access to genetic testing, public genomic health initiatives, and diversifying clinical and non-clinical roles comprise a dynamic environment that GCPs must respond to. While there is extensive literature regarding how other health professions adapt their curricula to changing environments, this has yet to be documented and explored for genetic counseling. This study aimed to understand how GCPs evolve their didactic curricula to keep up with the rapidly changing professional landscape. An online survey was used to recruit program leadership of fully accredited GCPs for semi-structured interviews. These interviews explored four critical factors of didactic curricular change, including drivers, implementation, barriers, and mechanisms for evaluation after a change has been made. Interview transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis based on iterative discussions with prioritization of excerpts from the codes that had been most commonly applied across multiple transcripts. Multiple factors were identified that program leadership must appropriately weigh when making curricular change decisions. The factors that were considered major influences by all participants included national accreditation standards, program stakeholders, sponsoring institutions and local genetic counseling communities, and the genetic counseling profession as a whole. Our data also demonstrated the extensive role program leadership plays in the adaptation of didactic curricula. With GCP leadership constantly identifying, implementing, and evaluating complex didactic curricular change, there is a need for further exploration of this topic and development of genetic counseling specific resources and tools.
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.