Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42369514›Full record

ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026

Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts.

Michael D Linderman, Sophia M Adelson, Tala M Berro, Jennifer L Anderson, Scott D Crawford, Tshaka J Cunningham, Edward D Esplin, Altovise T Ewing-Crawford, Daiva E Nielsen, Stacey Pereira and 18 more

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

28 authors.

Michael D LindermanORCID 0000-0002-9643-7148
Jennifer L Anderson
Tshaka J Cunningham
Altovise T Ewing-Crawford
Heather Andrighetti
Steven B Bleyl
George M Church
Eden V HaverfieldORCID 0000-0002-2126-0982
Lazaridis N Konstantinos
Molly McGinniss
Vaibhav Pandya
Bastian Greshake TzovarasORCID 0000-0002-9925-9623
PeopleSeq Study Team

Funding

Experiences and Outcomes in Early Adopters of Predispositional SequencingR01HG009922 · NHGRI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREEN, ROBERT C. · 2018 to 2020
$2.6M
Developing a Genomics Literacy MeasureR03HG008809 · NHGRI · MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE · PI LINDERMAN, MICHAEL DAVID · 2016 to 2017
$128k
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG009922NHGRI NIH HHS R03 HG008809
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: Elective genomic sequencing (EGS) returns monogenic disease findings in multiple genes, including potentially novel variants, and may also provide participants with carrier status, pharmacogenomic and other health-related information. The PeopleSeq Study assessed participants' motivations for and concerns about EGS and the associated clinical and psychosocial outcomes across diverse EGS providers. Methods: We administered a shared questionnaire to participants who chose to undergo EGS via 18 academic, clinical, or commercial EGS platforms. Results: We enrolled 1575 participants, of whom 1147 (72.8%) completed a questionnaire after receiving their EGS results. A majority (60.3%) of the participants who completed a post-result questionnaire self-reported receiving results they assessed as important, including negative findings, and 75.9% reported a form of health-related utility. Among a subset (19.4%) who shared their EGS reports, 16.6% (37 of Conclusions: Early adopters of EGS are motivated by general interest in their health as well as quasi-indication-based considerations such as family history. A majority of participants learned results they considered medically important, but a much smaller segment engaged healthcare providers with their results.

Identifiers

PMID42369514
PMCPMC13308077

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.