ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2025
What are patient perspectives on privacy and trust in digital genomic tools? A qualitative study.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision medicine decision-making under pharmacogenomics in nursing: realizing value from limited evidence to scaled clinical pathways.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- What are patient perspectives on privacy and trust in digital genomic tools? A qualitative study.Journal of genetic counseling · 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Digital tools have emerged as a promising solution to increase the efficiency and capacity of genomic services. However, accessing information through internet-based applications raises concerns about privacy and security risks. As patient-facing digital tools are developed for genomic medicine, it is vital to understand and incorporate patients' perspectives on digital privacy and security. A qualitative study was conducted using semi-structured interviews and interpretive description. Thirty participants who previously received genetic testing for themselves (n = 17) or their child (n = 13) were interviewed (n = 20 females, n = 15 above 50 years old). Participants were willing to store and access genomics personal health information (PHI) in a patient-facing digital platform. The main benefit identified by participants was the ability to access and control their own PHI. Participants expressed that the benefits of digital genomics services, such as patient empowerment and personalized care, outweighed the perceived risks, such as potential data leaks. In order to minimize risks, participants emphasized the importance of transparency about the security measures in place and who would have access to their PHI. These findings inform the design of digital genomic platforms to enhance patients' sense of security, which is critical for the uptake and usage of any platform.
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.