ArticleMultiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical
Assessing the feasibility, theoretical interest, and observed behaviors of adding genetic data to a patient-reported multiple sclerosis registry.
Article in Multiple sclerosis journal - experimental, translational and clinical. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Objectives: We aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of self-collected saliva for genetics from participants of a registry and determine whether responses to hypothetical questions regarding sharing of genetic information reflected observed behaviors. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study collecting saliva for a genetic study in the North American Research Committee on MS (NARCOMS) registry. We linked participants to a prior survey for a subset of participants with responses, to examine factors associated with concordance between consent status and hypothetical willingness to share genetic information using logistic regression. Results: Of ∼6200 participants contacted, 1227 expressed interest in the genetic study, 763 consented (62.2% of interested, ∼10% of those contacted) and most returned saliva samples (>80% of those consented). We found low agreement between the genetic study response and willingness to link genetic data (adjusted kappa = 0.186, standard error = 0.029). Multivariable regression identified no factors significantly associated with concordance between consent status and hypothetical willingness to share genetic information, though findings may reflect limited power. Conclusion: Among participants who expressed interest, most were willing to provide saliva for genetics studies, though hypothetical sharing of genetic information did not reflect actual behaviors, and overall participation represented a minority of those contacted.
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.