ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2026
Pilot Evaluation of a Digital Pretest Education Platform for Genomic Counseling: Perspectives of Health Care Providers and Patients.
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. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Traditional in-person consultations for genetic services create access barriers. We hypothesized that the Genetics Adviser platform-a web-based digital platform delivering clinical genomic services-could reduce these barriers. Focusing on pretest education and counseling, we tested a pilot version of the platform in medical genetics and pediatric endocrinology group practices. The multimethod design consisted of quantitative patient and caregiver surveys, Google Analytics data, and qualitative healthcare provider interviews. Surveys included validated measures of acceptability and empowerment. Transcribed interviews were thematically coded and analyzed using NVivo. Of the 102 patients and caregivers targeted for this study, 85/102 (83%) accessed the platform, 71/102 (70%) proceeded beyond the landing page, and 60/102 (59%) completed the post-module survey. Users expressed high confidence in genetic understanding and empowerment (Genomics Outcome Scale [GOS]: 77/100), and providers noted potential benefits and highlighted technological and content-related limitations. Further research is needed to validate effectiveness across diverse populations and to evaluate long-term impacts on patient outcomes and healthcare efficiency.
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.