ArticleJournal of community genetics2025
Self-assessed knowledge of genomic medicine among non-genetics physicians - results from a nationwide Swedish survey.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 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.
- Genomic Medicine Sweden: Advancing precision medicine at the national level.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Review
- Non-genetic physicians' self-assessment of knowledge and confidence toward genetic testing and counseling: a national survey in a high consanguineous population.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Meeting the demand: A collaborative approach in developing genetic counselling education in the Nordic countries.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Preparedness for working with genomic medicine among Swedish non-genetics physicians - a nation-wide survey study.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genomic medicine is becoming essential to clinical everyday practice in many medical fields. At the same time ethical, economic and practical challenges impede the mainstreaming of genomic medicine. Previous studies indicate that physicians without specific qualifications in genetic medicine may lack sufficient knowledge and/or confidence to efficiently practise genomic medicine. This study used a previously validated survey to investigate Swedish non-genetics physicians’ (n = 133) self-assessed knowledge, education needs and preferred mode of working with genomic medicine. Self-assessed knowledge varied widely between knowledge areas, with about 70% having knowledge in basic concepts and disorders/diseases, to about 35% having knowledge about cascade testing or legal implications. A majority reported that having more knowledge within the field of genomic medicine would change their clinical practice. Only 3% of participants preferred to manage genomic medicine patients fully on their own, while 56% preferred to manage such patients in their own practise but with support from regional genetics services or competence in-house. In contrast, 29% preferred to refer patients directly to regional genetics services. A majority desired more or better access to information material aimed at physicians and/or patients. Answering patterns generally corroborate previous findings from other countries. In summary, Swedish non-genetic physicians report sub-optimal levels of knowledge and desire much support in genomic medicine matters. The results have important implications for the interaction between regional genetics services and non-genetics physicians, as well as for the continuous education necessary to further the mainstreaming of genomic medicine.
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.