ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
Evaluating genetic counseling session duration: A scoping review of patient care time, influencing factors, and impact on patient outcomes.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effectiveness of Genetic Counseling Modalities on Knowledge, Attitudes, and Premarital Screening Intentions for Thalassemia Prevention: A Multi-Site Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Trial
- Assessing genetic counseling efficiency with natural language processing.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Evaluating genetic counseling session duration: A scoping review of patient care time, influencing factors, and impact on patient outcomes.Journal of genetic counseling · 2025Article
- Educational videos in genetic counseling: Meeting patients where they are?Genetics in medicine open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
One key element of evaluating the quality of a genetic counseling session is the measurement of its efficiency, yet limited research exists on how the genetic counseling process relates to time and which elements contribute to improved quality of care. A scoping review was undertaken to document studies that have reported genetic counseling patient care time and provide a landscape of the average patient care time, which factors impact patient care time, and how patient care time relates to experiences and outcomes. Twenty-five studies met criteria and were included. Patient care time was reported variably among the studies included. On average, genetic counseling patient care time was a mean of 60 min (53 min median) for observational studies and control groups in experimental studies and 44 min (41 min median) for intervention groups in experimental studies. Interventions impacting patient care time included pre-genetic counseling education and group genetic counseling sessions. The impact of patient care time on patient experiences and outcomes was rarely evaluated, and therefore, efficiency could not often be assessed in the studies. Studies that reported on patient care time and outcomes were able to draw conclusions such as shorter time did not negatively impact patients and some groups of patients may benefit from longer sessions. Most studies did not analyze the relationship between patient care time and patient experiences or outcomes. Future research should aim to identify factors influencing patient care time, assess the content of genetic counseling sessions, and evaluate patient care time in relation to patient experiences and outcomes. Understanding these aspects could lead to improved efficiency and patient-centered, equitable care in genetic counseling practices.
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.