ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Development of genetic assistant competencies using the Delphi consensus building method.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Genetic (counseling) assistants (GAs) perform administrative and coordination tasks that were traditionally assigned to genetic counselors. While almost half of genetic counselors work with a GA, the role lacks standardization. The aim of this study was to develop competencies that encapsulate the knowledge, skills, behaviors, and attitudes required for GA work. This study used a classic Delphi method. Expert participants were individuals with extensive experience with or knowledge of GA positions. In the first iteration, open-ended questions elicited the requisite knowledge and skills to complete GA tasks. Thematic analysis was used to draft sub-competencies. In the second and third iterations, participants ranked the appropriateness of each sub-competency. Sub-competencies that met consensus for inclusion (using a 70% agreement threshold) were grouped under broad competencies. Thirty-six individuals were recruited and of these, 29 to 31 participated in each iteration. Twenty eight of the 32 drafted sub-competencies reached consensus for inclusion. These were grouped within six overarching competencies that encompass: value- and principle-based behaviors, interpersonal and communication skills, coordination of genetic service delivery, genetics knowledge, genetic testing knowledge, and support of clinicians. The competency framework developed in this study contributes to the standardization of the GA role across practice settings and specialties.
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.