SynthesisFrontiers in public health2024
Genetic testing in psychiatry, the perceptions of healthcare workers and patients: a mini review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring early intervention in psychosis (EIP) perspectives towards pharmacogenomics (PGx) implementation to support antipsychotic prescribing: a multi-method qualitative exploration.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Biomarker-Driven Approaches to Bone Metastases: From Molecular Mechanisms to Clinical Applications.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Analyzing ethical dimensions of mental disorders: trends and key research areas through bibliometric methods.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2025Article
- Factors influencing patient decision-making on a multimodal precision medicine algorithm for depression: a qualitative European multicentre study of the PROMPT consortium.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Genetic testing in psychiatry has gained attention, raising questions about its application and impact. Understanding stakeholders' perspectives, including healthcare providers and patients, is vital for informed policy development. The aim of this systematic review was to focus on the perceptions and concerns of patients and healthcare workers in psychiatry regarding the use of genetic testing. Methods: We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines, for the period 1/2/2014, to 1/1/2024, via PubMed and Embase databases identifying 50 articles in total. After excluding duplicates ( Results: Among 15 selected studies involving 3,156 participants (2,347 healthcare professionals; 809 patients), thematic analysis identified four primary themes: Organizational-implementation concerns, Ethical Considerations, Concerns on changes in clinical praxis, and Legal implications. Despite these concerns, seven out of eleven studies indicated that healthcare workers viewed genetic testing in psychiatry positively. Patients' perspectives varied, with two of the four studies reflecting positive attitudes. No pervasive negative sentiment was observed. Conclusion: Our review highlights the multidimensional perspectives of healthcare professionals and patients surrounding the application of genetic testing in psychiatry. These considerations need to be addressed to facilitate the implementation of genetic testing in clinical praxis in psychiatry. Further research is needed for validation of the results and to guide policies and clinicians in the integration of genetic testing into mental healthcare practice.
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.