ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2023
Knowledge, attitudes and decision regret: a longitudinal survey study of participants offered genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Patient Perspectives and Demographic Factors Influencing Non-Participation in a Large Genomics Study.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2026Article
- Population Genomic Screening for Hereditary Cancer Risk: Patient Experience, Perceptions, and Downstream Clinical Outcomes.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- Patients offered genomic testing for rare disease and cancer: a real-world evaluation of impact and processes of care.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2026Article
- Factors influencing shared decision-making and decision regret in parents of children undergoing myopia control within one year.BMC ophthalmology · 2025Article
- Article
- Experiences of participants with undiagnosed diseases and hereditary cancers during the initial phase of the Hong Kong genome project: a mixed-methods study.Human genomics · 2025Article
- What does a consent conversation for whole genome sequencing look like in the NHS Genomic Medicine Service? An observational study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Observational
- Parental knowledge, attitudes, satisfaction and decisional conflict regarding whole genome sequencing in the Genomic Medicine Service: a multisite survey study in England.Journal of medical genetics · 2025Article
- 2023 in the European Journal of Human Genetics.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2024Article
- Ambivalence and regret in genome sequencing.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We used cross-sectional surveys to compare the knowledge, attitudes, and decision regret of participants who had consented for genome sequencing (GS) for rare disease diagnosis in the 100,000 Genomes Project (100kGP) across two timepoints (at the time of consenting for GS (T1) and 12-18 months later (T2)). At T1, participants (n = 504) completed a survey that included measures of general knowledge of GS ("Knowledge of Genome Sequencing" (KOGS)), specific knowledge of GS and attitudes towards GS ("General attitudes" and "Specific attitudes"). At T2, participants (n = 296) completed these same assessments (apart from the specific knowledge scale) together with an assessment of decision regret towards GS ("Decisional Regret Scale"). At 12-18 months after consenting for GS, participants' basic knowledge of GS had remained stable. General knowledge of GS varied across topics; concepts underlying more general information about genetics were better understood than the technical details of genomic testing. Attitudes towards GS at T2 were generally positive, and feelings towards GS (both positive and negative) remained unchanged. However, those who were more positive about the test at the outset had greater specific knowledge (as opposed to general knowledge) of GS. Finally, although the majority of participants indicated feeling little regret towards undergoing GS, those with low positive attitude and high negative attitude about GS at T1 reported greater decision regret at T2. Careful assessment of patient knowledge about and attitudes towards GS at the time of offering testing is crucial for supporting informed decision making and mitigating later regret.
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.