ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
Harmonising the scope of practice for genetic counsellors in the D-A-CH region: a cross-border consensus for Germany, Austria, and Switzerland.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. 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.
- Genomics cycle: discover, diagnose, interpret, act.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Beyond the sequence.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid integration of genomics into clinical practice has increased the demand for genetic counselling services. While the genetic counsellor (GC) profession is well established in the Anglo-American healthcare systems, the D-A-CH countries, Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, operate under distinct, physician-led legal frameworks. To ensure high-quality care and professional mobility, a harmonised definition of the GC's role is necessary. The newly founded GfH Commission for GCs, in collaboration with the national human genetics societies of Germany (GfH), Austria (ÖGH), and Switzerland (SGMG), the Association of German Human Geneticists (BVDH), and the Swiss Association of GCs (ASCG), conducted a multi-stage consensus-building process. The methodology involved a comparative analysis of national legal prerequisites and the application of the entrustable professional activities framework to define the interprofessional interface between GCs and medical geneticists (MGs). The resulting scope of practice (SoP) categorizes competencies across three clinical phases: pre-counselling preparation, the active counselling process, and post-analytical follow-up. The SoP distinguishes between independent GC tasks, shared clinical responsibilities, and tasks requiring MGs. Key to this model is the preservation of the legal physician-prerogative for aspects like the final medical diagnosis and test-ordering while maximizing the GC's contribution to patient-centred communication and care. This cross-border consensus represents a landmark in European professional policy, providing a scalable blueprint for the integration of GCs into regulated medical systems. By harmonising standards across the D-A-CH countries, the SoP ensures quality assurance, provides a robust evidence base for future legislative recognition and reimbursement of GCs, and facilitates professional mobility in Europe. Genetic counsellor, professional policy, D-A-CH region, interprofessional collaboration, entrustable professional activities, scope of practice, Genetische Fachberater, GfH, ÖGH, SGMG, BVDH, ASCG.
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.