ArticleAlzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association2025
Deciding on genetic testing for familial dementia: Perspectives of patients and families.
Article in Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recommendations for genetic counseling for individuals at risk of autosomal dominant Alzheimer's disease in Latin America.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026Article
- Impact of diagnostic genetic testing for familial dementia: experiences of patients and relatives.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2026Article
- Advances in AI-based diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease using MRI: a comprehensive survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Polygenic risk scores in healthcare contexts: what's the scope? An interview study of European healthcare providers and researchers' perspectives on ethical challenges.Human genetics · 2025Article
- Deciding on genetic testing for familial dementia: Perspectives of patients and families.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionWe explored patients' and families' interest in, predictors of, and considerations regarding genetic testing for monogenic causes of dementia in a diagnostic setting.
methodsThis mixed-methods study evaluated 519 consecutive Alzheimer Center Amsterdam patients for monogenic testing eligibility. Among those qualifying, differences between testers and non-testers were analyzed. Thirty-three patients completed questionnaires. Additionally, we conducted 21 semi-structured interviews with 15 patients and 18 relatives. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed inductively.
resultsOf 138 (27%) eligible patients (46% female, age 61 ± 8 years, Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] 22 ± 6), 75 (54%) underwent genetic testing. Testers had better cognition, higher quality of life, and more often undetermined diagnoses than non-testers (all p < 0.05). Decisions were guided by intuitive, value-driven judgments: testers sought to provide heredity information to relatives, enhance actionability, and reduce uncertainty, while non-testers worried about psychosocial impact on family, or unfavorable timing. DISCUSSION: The substantial interest in genetic testing for monogenic causes of dementia underscores the need for further research into the implications of disclosing test results to memory clinic patients. HIGHLIGHTS: Half of memory clinic patients' who met eligibility criteria proceeded with genetic testing. Those tested were more likely to have an undetermined diagnosis, better cognition, and higher quality of life. Decisions were motivated less by deliberation of factual information, and more by quick, intuitive judgments. Motivations pro included providing information, enhancing actionability, and resolving uncertainty. Motivations con comprised concerns about the emotional burden and disruptive impact on their family.
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.