Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41852596›Full record

ArticleGenetics in medicine open2026

A population-representative survey on attitudes toward genomic newborn screening in Germany.

Elena Sophia Doll, Karla Alex, Carlotta Julia Mayer, Heiko Brennenstuhl, Ulrike Mütze, Hadley Stevens Smith, Charlotte Raithel, Elmar Brähler, Ralf Müller-Terpitz, Stefan Kölker and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics in medicine open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Elena Sophia DollHeidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Karla AlexHeidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical and Data Ethics, Heidelberg, Germany.
Carlotta Julia MayerHeidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heiko BrennenstuhlInstitute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Ulrike MützeHeidelberg University, Medical Faculty, Center for Child and Adolescent Medicine, Division of Child Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany.
Hadley Stevens SmithPRecisiOn Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
Charlotte RaithelHeidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Elmar BrählerDepartment for Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Ralf Müller-TerpitzLaw of Economic Regulation and Media, Public Law, Faculty of Law, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Stefan KölkerHeidelberg University, Medical Faculty, Center for Child and Adolescent Medicine, Division of Child Neurology and Metabolic Medicine, Heidelberg, Germany.
Christian P SchaafInstitute of Human Genetics, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Eva C WinklerHeidelberg University, Faculty of Medicine, Institute for Medical and Data Ethics, Heidelberg, Germany.
Beate DitzenHeidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Julia MahalHeidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study assessed general attitudes toward genomic newborn screening (gNBS) among the German public. Methods: In a population-representative survey, we assessed self-rated prior knowledge of gNBS, newborn screening (NBS), and genome sequencing and perceived attitudinal and informational uncertainty and agreement with potential advantages and disadvantages of gNBS via paper-based questionnaire. Sociodemographic information was obtained through interviews. Analyses included descriptive statistics and multiple linear regressions. Results: Respondents ( Conclusion: Perceptions of gNBS were predominantly positive, although marked by uncertainty and low prior knowledge. Although some sociodemographic differences emerged, their influence on attitudes was limited. Additional factors, such as personality traits, may help explain attitude differences. Given low prior knowledge and its association with support for gNBS, improving genetic literacy through diverse outreach strategies is essential to enhance public acceptance of gNBS in Germany.

Indexed as

AttitudesGenomic neonatal screeningGenomic newborn screeningKnowledgePublic

Identifiers

PMID41852596
PMCPMC12992999

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.