Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42040955›Full record

ArticleResearch square2026

Precision Medicine in Rural Settings: Patient Perspectives on Clinician-Ordered Genetic Testing.

Anne C Madeo, Kimberly A Kaphingst, Melissa Yack, Erin D Bouldin, Chelsey R Schlechter, Sarah Dallas, Gwenndolyn Porter, Jennie L Hill

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in Research square, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Anne C MadeoUniversity of Utah.
Kimberly A KaphingstUniversity of Utah.
Melissa YackUniversity of Utah.
Erin D BouldinUniversity of Utah.
Chelsey R SchlechterUniversity of Utah.
Sarah DallasUniversity of Utah.
Gwenndolyn PorterGwenn Porter Consulting.
Jennie L HillUniversity of Utah.

Funding

UTAH REGIONAL CANCER CENTERP30CA042014 · NCI · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI Jared P Rutter · 1986 to 2026
$72.6M
CTSA UM1 Program at University of UtahUM1TR004409 · NCATS · UTAH STATE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM--UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI RACHEL HESS, Jennifer Juhl Majersik · 2023 to 2026
$21.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UM1 TR004409NCI NIH HHS P30 CA042014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGenetic testing is a cornerstone of precision medicine, yet evidence on rural genetic testing use is limited. Reduced access to specialty services and geographic barriers in rural settings may influence how rural residents experience and use genetic testing. Understanding contextual determinants and pre-implementation outcomes of clinician-ordered genetic testing is critical for enhancing access to precision medicine.

methodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with rural residents in the Mountain West region of the United States who had discussed reproductive genetic carrier screening or disease risk genetic testing with a clinician. Interviews were thematically analyzed using a hybrid deductive-inductive approach informed by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model and the Implementation Outcomes Framework, with a focus on contextual determinants and the implementation outcomes acceptability and appropriateness.

resultsParticipants were 30 predominantly college-educated non-Hispanic White residents of rural counties in Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Wyoming or Utah who had discussed disease risk or reproductive carrier genetic testing with a clinician. Participants generally perceived genetic testing discussed with a clinician as acceptable and appropriate, particularly when testing reduced uncertainty, supported reproductive decision-making or family responsibility, and was perceived as actionable. Ease and convenience of testing, out-of-pocket costs, insurance coverage, emotional readiness, and alignment with personal values influenced acceptability. Appropriateness was closely linked to clinician communication and interpersonal practices, including how clinicians explained testing, framed its relevance, and engaged patients in decision-making. Barriers to genetic testing for rural residents included having to navigate geographic distance, fragmented referral processes, and limited local specialty capacity, often relying on referrals to metropolitan healthcare systems.

conclusionsAmong rural residents who discussed genetic testing with a clinician, genetic testing was primarily perceived as acceptable and appropriate; however, access was patient driven in the context of constrained rural healthcare infrastructure. These findings suggest that rural inequities in the uptake of precision medicine tools like genetic testing may be driven less by patient attitudes and more by the organization, communication, and delivery of genetic services within rural health systems.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingHumansIdahoImplementation ScienceMontanaNevadaQualitative ResearchRural PopulationUtahWyoming

Identifiers

PMID42040955
PMCPMC13105141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.