ArticleJournal of community genetics2020
Attitudes towards genetic testing and information: does parenthood shape the views?
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Socioeconomic and clinical factors associated with genetic testing completion in Stargardt disease.Genetics in medicine open · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of the General Population Regarding Peripheral Blood Chromosomal Testing in the Premarital or Preconception Context.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2025Article
- Navigating family dynamics and ethical considerations in genetic diagnosis of pulmonary arterial hypertension: insights from in-depth semi-structured interviews.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Health-related roles of older generations in families with inherited genetic conditions: a scoping review.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Demographic Determinants Influencing the Adoption of Genetic Testing for Cardiovascular Diseases in Japan - Insights From a Large-Scale Online Survey.Circulation reports · 2024Article
- Attitudes among parents of persons with autism spectrum disorder towards information about genetic risk and future health.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2022Article
- The good, the bad, and the utilitarian: attitudes towards genetic testing and implications for disability.Current psychology (New Brunswick, N.J.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study examines how parents of pediatric patients might differ in their views and attitudes towards genetic technology and information when compared to adult patients. There is surprisingly little evidence on how parents compare to other parts of population in their attitudes. Previous empirical studies often relate health-related preferences and attitudes to factors such as age, education, and income instead of parental status, thus evading comparison of parents to others as health-related decision makers. Findings related to the parental status can be useful when implementing genetic technology in clinical practice. We conducted a survey of views on genetic technology and information for groups of adult neurology patients (n = 68) and parents of pediatric neurology patients (n = 31) to shed some light on this issue. In addition to our own survey instrument, we conducted other surveys to gain insight on psychosocial factors that might affect these attitudes. The results suggest that parents are more concerned about their children's genetic risk factors when compared to the attitudes of adult patients about their own risk. For both groups, negative emotional state was associated with more concerns towards genetic information. Our study provides insights on how parental views might affect the acceptance of genetic technology and information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.