ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Digital genetic counseling services for cascade cardiogenetic testing.
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. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patients' and healthcare professionals' experiences with implementing the Rosa chatbot in mainstream genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Digital interventions are potentially promising to improve accessibility and efficiency of genetic counseling services. However, current literature on user perspectives toward digital tools for cascade testing is limited. Therefore, this focus-group study aimed to gain insights into the attitude and perspectives of probands, at-risk relatives (ARR), and genetic healthcare professionals (HCP) toward digital innovations for assistance with both pretest and posttest counseling and cascade genetic testing in cardiogenetics. We conducted seven online focus groups, which were transcribed and thematically analyzed. In total, 37 individuals participated (10 probands, 11 ARR and 16 HCP). Thematic analysis of focus group transcripts showed a first theme of (1) acceptability of digital tools. Other identified themes were defined as "domains," where digital tools impact traditional, in-person clinical genetic care, being (2) family communication, (3) decision-making, (4) care relations, and (5) the genetic care system. Participants expressed a predominantly positive attitude toward the digitization of (parts of) the predictive genetic counseling journey in cardiogenetics under the condition that access to human contact is preserved. In the clinical setting of predictive counseling, efforts should be made to ensure access to genetic services for all ARR and to protect in-person involvement of HCP.
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.