ArticleJournal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP2021
Assessing the knowledge, perceptions, and practices of primary care clinicians toward pharmacogenetics.
Article in Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinician Satisfaction With Pharmacogenomics Clinical Services at a Multistate Health System.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Enhancing the Integration of Pre-Emptive Pharmacogenetic (PGx) Testing in Primary Care: Prioritizing Underserved Patients' Preferences in Implementation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Article
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
Introduction: Pharmacogenetics (PGx) testing is becoming increasingly available to patients and clinicians, but investigations of PGx testing in primary care and the pharmacist's role in educating clinicians have been limited. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to: (a) determine the utilization of PGx testing in primary care clinics, (b) identify how clinicians document and act on PGx test results, and (c) determine clinician interest in PGx education or consultation from pharmacists. Methods: A 16-item survey was distributed via email. Eligible participants included physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists who work in family medicine, general medicine, geriatric, or pediatric primary care clinics at one academic medical center. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the frequency of PGx tests ordered in primary care clinics, provider comfort with PGx test interpretation, documentation practices, and interest in PGx education or consultation from pharmacists. Results: The overall survey response rate was 15.8% ( Discussion: Clinicians in this survey were more likely to have patients bring in results than to order PGx tests, did not feel confident in result interpretation, and expressed interest in working with pharmacists for PGx test interpretation. This research can help guide the development of PGx-focused pharmacy services and education for clinicians who are encountering PGx testing in their practice.
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.