ReviewHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Exploring Literacy and Knowledge Gaps and Disparities in Genetics and Oncogenomics Among Cancer Patients and the General Population: A Scoping Review.
Review in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Integrating genomic medicine into primary care -examining perceptions of community advisory board members.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Development of a question prompt list to support Consent for Genomic Testing (CoGenT) and research.Human genetics · 2026Article
- Aligning awareness, systems and policy to increase equitable access to genomically driven cancer care.BMJ oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenetic and genomic literacy is pivotal in empowering cancer patients and citizens to navigate the complexities of omics sciences, resolve misconceptions surrounding clinical research and genetic/genomic testing, and make informed decisions about their health. In a fast-evolving scenario where routine testing has become widespread in healthcare, this scoping review sought to pinpoint existing gaps in literacy and understanding among cancer patients and the general public regarding genetics and genomics.
methodsAdhering to the PRISMA framework, the review included 43 studies published between January 2018 and June 2024, which evaluated the understanding of genetics and genomics among cancer patients, caregivers, and citizens.
resultsAlthough the selected studies had significant heterogeneity in populations and evaluation tools, our findings indicate inadequate literacy levels, with citizens displaying lower proficiency than cancer patients and caregivers. This review highlighted consistent knowledge gaps in understanding the genetic and genomic underpinnings of diseases, encompassing misconceptions about mutation types and inheritance patterns, limited awareness of available genetic testing options, and difficulties in interpreting test results. Ethical and privacy concerns and the psychological impact of genetic testing were also common, highlighting the imperative need for effective communication between healthcare providers and patients.
conclusionsGiven the dynamic nature of genomic science, the review underscores the need for continuously evolving educational programs tailored to diverse populations. Our findings could guide the development of educational resources addressed explicitly to cancer patients, caregivers, and the lay public.
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.