ArticlePharmacogenomics and personalized medicine2021
The Landscape of Clinical Implementation of Pharmacogenetic Testing in Central China: A Single-Center Study.
Article in Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Pharmacogenetic Landscape: Identification of Clinically Relevant Genotypes by a Nation-Wide Medical Testing Laboratory in Romania.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Pharmacogenetic Testing in the Outpatient Setting in Switzerland: A Descriptive Study Using Swiss Claims Data.Drug safety · 2025Article
- Scoping review of enablers and challenges of implementing pharmacogenomics testing in the primary care settings.BMJ open · 2024Article
- Assessing pharmacogenomic literacy in China through validation of the Chinese version of the Minnesota Assessment of Pharmacogenomic Literacy.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- A national survey of individualized pharmaceutical care practice in Chinese hospitals in 2019.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Advancing pharmacogenetic testing in a tertiary hospital: a retrospective analysis after 10 years of activity.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePharmacogenetic testing is recognized as the major method for the individualized pharmacotherapy in clinical pharmacy practice, but information about the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in China is limited. The present study aimed to determine the situation of clinical implementation for pharmacogenetic testing in central China.
methodsThe study is conducted in the department of clinical pharmacy in The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China. We collected and analyzed pharmacogenetic testing results from November 1, 2013 to November 2, 2018 in our hospital, which were checked in the electronic medical record system. The main outcome measures were the number and type of pharmacogenetic testing across five years.
resultsA total of 47,265 (56.9% male, mean age = 51.5 years) pharmacogenetic testing results were obtained with an average annual rate of growth of 63.0% across five years. A 50.2% (23,748/47,265) of all the pharmacogenetic testing results were for the determination of cytochrome P450 2C19 (
conclusionClinical implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in China is growing rapidly, but the types and implementing departments of pharmacogenetic testing were limited. Our present study reported the real-world implementation modality of pharmacogenomic tests in China. It will help us to understand the testing of pharmacogenetics in China in order to promote the rational development of pharmacogenetics.
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.