ArticleJournal of community genetics2026
Views and experiences regarding workplace genetic testing: findings from a national survey of U.S. employees.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The emergence of voluntary health-related genetic testing in workplace wellness programs indicates a need to understand employees’ views and experiences regarding workplace genetic testing (wGT). A large, diverse national sample of employed adults (N=2000; median age=43 years; 51.1% female; 33% non-white) completed a web survey of their wGT views and experiences. Although 80% of participants indicated their employer did not offer wGT, 54.1% were interested in testing, especially (somewhat/very) for cancer (89.2%), heart disease (93.1%), and Alzheimer’s disease (85.3%). Characteristics associated with wGT interest included younger age (<55 years), Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, genetic testing experience or familiarity, and a positive family medical history (all p<0.05). Reasons for pursuing wGT (e.g., inform health behaviors) were endorsed more frequently than reasons for declining (e.g., insurance/employability concerns). Among participants offered wGT (20%), 60% indicated having undergone testing. Test uptake was associated with personal medical history, greater familiarity with genetic testing, and self-reported physical health (all p<0.05). A minority of employed adults surveyed reported being offered, or having had, wGT. Nevertheless, many employees are potentially interested in wGT, particularly for common diseases. Although employees have wGT concerns, many view it as beneficial to inform health behaviors and decisions.
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.