Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40497788›Full record

ArticlePersonalized medicine2025

Perceived understanding and psychosocial outcomes: employees' responses to learning results of workplace genetic testing.

Elizabeth Charnysh, Sarah McCain, Alexandra Truhlar, Subhamoy Pal, Jonathan M Reader, Kunal Sanghavi, Wendy R Uhlmann, Katherine Hendy, Amy Leader, Drew Blasco and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Personalized medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

16 authors.

Elizabeth CharnyshThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
Sarah McCainDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Equity, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Alexandra TruhlarThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
Subhamoy PalMichigan Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jonathan M ReaderMichigan Alzheimer's Disease Research Center, Department of Neurology, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Kunal SanghaviThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
Wendy R UhlmannDepartments of Internal Medicine and Human Genetics, University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Katherine HendyDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Equity, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Amy LeaderCollege of Life Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Drew BlascoDepartment of Social and Behavioral Health, School of Public Health, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, USA.
Anya E R PrinceUniversity of Iowa College of Law, Iowa City, IA, USA.
William Gregory FeeroMaine Dartmouth Family Medicine Residency, Augusta, ME, USA.
Rachael BrandtCollege of Life Sciences, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Veda N GiriYale School of Medicine and Yale Cancer Center, New Haven, CT, USA.
Charles LeeThe Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, CT, USA.
J Scott RobertsDepartment of Health Behavior & Health Equity, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

Research Education ComponentP30AG072931 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI Ana Marie Daugherty · 2021 to 2026
$26.5M
Genetic Counselors and Workplace Genomic TestingR01HG010679 · NHGRI · JACKSON LABORATORY · PI LEE, CHARLES, ROBERTS, SCOTT · 2020 to 2023
$3.7M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG010679NIA NIH HHS P30 AG072931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThis study explored employees' understanding of, and psychosocial responses to, workplace genetic testing (wGT) results. MATERIALS &

methodsEmployees of a US healthcare system who underwent wGT (hereditary cancer/heart disease risk, pharmacogenomics) and received results were surveyed. We ascertained pretest education engagement, test understanding, and psychosocial responses. Regression analyses identified predictors of scores on a modified Feelings About genomiC Test Results questionnaire (positive feelings, negative emotions, and uncertainty after wGT).

results

conclusionswGT was associated with low levels of measured psychosocial harm among participants. However, results suggested a greater likelihood of negative psychosocial responses among those with increased risk of cancer/heart disease and non-Hispanic African American/Black employees. Future studies should explore strategies to ensure all employees undergoing wGT have educational and psychosocial support.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingAdultEmotionsFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPerceptionSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkplacedirect-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testingethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI)hereditary cancershereditary cardiac conditionspharmacogenomics (PGx)psychosocial responsesunderstandingWorkplace genetic testing (wGT)

Identifiers

PMID40497788
PMCPMC12239088

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.