ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2026
The role of pathology laboratories in integrating genetic testing into Australian primary care: an implementation science perspective.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As genomic testing moves into mainstream healthcare, non-genetic healthcare professionals, including general practitioners (GPs), play a critical role as gatekeepers to genetic services. Laboratories are essential in supporting this transition by providing not only high-quality genetic tests but also point-of-care tools, educational materials and clinical guidance to support their use. This study aimed to explore how these tools and supports are conceptualized, developed, implemented and evaluated and how laboratories integrate them into their relationships with GPs, an essential process for paving the way toward better use of genomics in primary care. A qualitative study design was employed using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with representatives from genetic laboratories across Australia. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided deductive content analysis of data. Findings spanned the four CFIR domains (Intervention Characteristics, Outer Setting, Inner Setting and Implementation Process) across 34 constructs. Participants reported that laboratories viewed point-of-care tools and resources as essential responses to persistent genomic knowledge gaps among GPs. Development of evidence-based, practice-driven and adaptable resources was supported and rewarded within laboratory organisations. A strong culture of clinical responsibility and implementation readiness, combined with robust networks and communications, enabled timely support for GPs. Gaps identified included lack of implementation planning, misalignments between laboratory-developed resources and GPs' real-world needs and inadequate mechanisms for obtaining GPs' feedback, which made evaluation problematic. By applying an implementation science framework, these findings provide insights for future efforts to build and sustain the provision of point-of-care tools and support, ultimately improving the integration of genomics in primary care.
Identifiers
42728320What 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.