Evidence mapPaperPMID 30307272Full record

SynthesisHealth psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association2018

Behavioral impact of return of genetic test results for complex disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maia J Frieser, Sylia Wilson, Scott Vrieze

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Systematic Review: The Psychosocial Impacts of Autism-Related Genetic Testing.Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Predictors of genetic risk recall among the participants of a randomized controlled precision prevention trial against melanoma.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2023
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Impact of personal genomic risk information on melanoma prevention behaviors and psychological outcomes: a randomized controlled trial.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

3 authors.

Maia J FrieserInstitute for Behavioral Genetics.ORCID 0000-0002-1741-4256
Sylia WilsonDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
Scott VriezeDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Funding

National Institutes of HealthNHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG008983NIAAA NIH HHS R01 AA023974NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA037280NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA037904NIDA NIH HHS R21 DA040177University of Michigan
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAdvances in genomewide association studies have made possible the return of genetic risk results for complex diseases. Two concerns about these results are (a) negative psychological consequences and (b) viewing probabilistic results as deterministic, leading to misinterpretation and inappropriate decisions. The present study evaluates these concerns through a meta-analytic review of existing literature.

methodSeventeen genetic testing studies of complex disease, including 1,171 participants and reporting 195 effects, 104 of which were unadjusted for covariates, were meta-analyzed under a random effects model. Diseases included Alzheimer's, cardiovascular and coronary heart disease, lung cancer, melanoma, thrombophilia, and type II diabetes. Six domains of behavioral-psychological reactions were examined.

resultsCarriers showed significantly increased self-reported behavior change compared to noncarriers when assessed 6 months or later after results return (Hedges's g = .36, p = .019).

conclusionsReturn of genetic testing results for complex disease does not strongly impact self-reported negative behavior or psychological function of at-risk individuals. Return of results does appear to moderately increase self-reported healthy behavior in carriers, although research on objectively observed behavior change is needed. This is a growing area of research, with preliminary results suggesting potential positive implications of genetic testing for complex disease on behavior change. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

DiseaseGenetic TestingHumans

Identifiers

PMID30307272
PMCPMC6263735

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 Socratic graph.