ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Readiness and leadership for the implementation of polygenic risk scores: Genetic healthcare providers' perspectives in the hereditary cancer context.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and pilot testing of a prostate cancer polygenic risk report.BMC medical genomics · 2026Trial
- Readiness and leadership for the implementation of polygenic risk scores: Genetic healthcare providers' perspectives in the hereditary cancer context.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic healthcare providers and organizations must be made ready for potential future clinical implementation of polygenic risk scores (PRS) for hereditary breast and ovarian (HBOC) cancer risk assessment. Understanding the multi-level factors that contribute to readiness for change will assist leaders with strategic planning and selection of facilitative implementation strategies, ultimately reducing resource wastage and increasing the likelihood of implementation success. Evidence is missing on the current state of readiness in the Australian cancer genomics sector. The aim of this study was to explore genetic healthcare providers' perspectives on organizational readiness and leadership. Participants were recruited through professional networks to complete an online, quantitative survey encompassing multiple validated evidence-based tools. Analyses included descriptive and inferential statistics. Participants (N = 40) were majority female (N = 31, 77.5%) and in clinical roles (N = 31, 77.5%). A high level of personal capability and organizational readiness was found, with current workplace behaviors and culture being enablers for implementation. Barriers to readiness were knowledge of implementation and evaluative processes for PRS and insufficient resourcing. Leaders were confident in their roles and supportive and perseverant behaviors. Participants in non-leadership roles regarded leadership at an average level. Overall, leadership proactivity toward implementation of PRS for HBOC risk assessment was low. If implementation is to be successful, investment in further developing organizational climates conducive to change is required, focusing on interventions to bolster entrepreneurial leadership behaviors and increase implementation competency and resourcing. Further research into readiness and leadership in clinical cancer genetics is needed.
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.