ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2025
Addressing genetic discrimination for stronger legal protections and enhanced public awareness.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 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.
- Understanding Barriers and Motivators of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Genetic Testing: Insights From the Singapore Public.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- A Portable, Patient-Possessed Health Record: Architecture for Care Coordination as an Alternative to Centralized Data Aggregation.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Singapore has advanced in precision medicine, which is largely based on genetic testing and sequencing, yet its safeguard against genetic discrimination (GD) is limited to a non-binding insurance moratorium, with no protections in employment. This study examined the prevalence of self-reported GD and factors influencing willingness to undergo genetic testing in Singapore. A cross-sectional survey assessed experiences of GD, awareness of protections and testing willingness. Twenty percent reported GD in insurance and 9% in employment. The majority identified existing safeguards incorrectly. Sixty-four percent expressed willingness to undergo medically indicated genetic testing. Willingness was positively associated with education, trust in healthcare and perceived fair treatment and negatively associated with age, parental status, deterministic thinking and cultural-religious beliefs. The results highlight that, though policymakers aim to mitigate GD in Singapore, enhanced legal protections and public education are needed to support equitable access to genetic testing.
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.