ArticlePharmacogenomics and personalized medicine2023
Mental Health Prescribers' Perceptions on the Use of Pharmacogenetic Testing in the Management of Depression in the Middle East and North Africa Region.
Article in Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genetic testing in psychiatry, the perceptions of healthcare workers and patients: a mini review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Normalising the Implementation of Pharmacogenomic (PGx) Testing in Adult Mental Health Settings: A Theory-Based Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Exploring perceived barriers and attitudes in young adults towards antidepressant pharmacotherapy, including the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing to optimize prescription practices.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Utility of pharmacogenetic testing to optimise antidepressant pharmacotherapy in youth: a narrative literature review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: A wide variety of commercial pharmacogenetic (PGx) tools are available worldwide to guide treatment selection for depression based on individuals' genetic profiles. However, the use of genetic testing to inform psychiatric care has faced challenges due to the limited training and education for mental health clinicians. The aim of this study was to explore the knowledge, level of engagement, and perspectives on the use of PGx testing when making depression management decisions among practicing psychiatrists within the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Methods: This is a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Consenting psychiatrists were interviewed through an online platform (Skype Results: Eighteen interviews from 12 countries have been conducted. Analysis of the current interviews produced five major themes including: (1) Overall perceptions and attitudes; (2) Knowledge and awareness; (3) Education, training, and professional experience; (4) Facilitators and barriers; and (5) Ethical dilemmas. These themes support the notion that there is limited, mostly basic, education, knowledge, and training regarding genetic testing in the management of depression, although there is significant interest and willingness in the part of prescribers to adopt this strategy in their practice. Conclusion: The findings of the study suggest that psychiatrists practicing in the MENA region appear to be interested in implementing PGx testing when managing people with depression. However, it is also important to recognize that this cannot be achieved unless more supporting strategies are implemented within their current health system environment.
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.