Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40396552›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurology2025

Barriers to clinical genetic testing in movement disorders.

Dennis Yeow, Laura I Rudaks, Kishore R Kumar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Collaborative Genomics for Dystonia in Central and Eastern Europe: Successes Achieved, New Frontiers Ahead.Movement disorders : official journal of the Movement Disorder Society · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Dennis YeowNeurology Department and Molecular Medicine Laboratory, Concord Repatriation General Hospital.
Laura I RudaksNeurology Department and Molecular Medicine Laboratory, Concord Repatriation General Hospital.
Kishore R KumarNeurology Department and Molecular Medicine Laboratory, Concord Repatriation General Hospital.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe number of known genetic movement disorders and potential treatments for these disorders have grown rapidly over the last few decades. Despite this, genetic testing for movement disorders remains relatively underutilized in clinical practice. In this review, we explore a number of barriers that prevent more routine and widespread use of genetic testing for movement disorders. RECENT

findingsCost and limited health insurance coverage as well as difficulty accessing genetic testing and counselling are major barriers to genetic testing and disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries and specific sociodemographic groups. Clinician misperceptions and limited knowledge about genetic testing for movements disorders as well as patient and clinician concerns about the potential for genetic discrimination are further obstacles. Despite these barriers, several recent international collaborative studies have demonstrated the feasibility of delivering clinical genetic testing and genetic counselling for movement disorders on a large scale. SUMMARY: Concerted action at multiple organizational levels (government, specialty societies, health insurance organizations, etc.) is required in order to address the identified barriers and improve utilization of genetic testing in movement disorders on a global scale.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingHealth Services AccessibilityMovement DisordersGenetic CounselingHumansaccessibilitybarriersgenetic testingmovement disorders

Identifiers

PMID40396552
PMCPMC12237105

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.