Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 94

1.

Australians' perspectives on support around use of personal genomic testing: Findings from the Genioz study.

Metcalfe SA, Hickerton C, Savard J, Stackpoole E, Tytherleigh R, Tutty E, Terrill B, Turbitt E, Gray K, Middleton A, Wilson B, Newson AJ, Gaff C.

Eur J Med Genet. 2018 Nov 13. pii: S1769-7212(18)30438-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.11.002. [Epub ahead of print]

2.

Australians' views on personal genomic testing: focus group findings from the Genioz study.

Metcalfe SA, Hickerton C, Savard J, Terrill B, Turbitt E, Gaff C, Gray K, Middleton A, Wilson B, Newson AJ.

Eur J Hum Genet. 2018 Aug;26(8):1101-1112. doi: 10.1038/s41431-018-0151-1. Epub 2018 Apr 30.

3.

Australians' knowledge and perceptions of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing.

Savard J, Mooney-Somers J, Newson AJ, Kerridge I.

Intern Med J. 2014 Jan;44(1):27-31. doi: 10.1111/imj.12289.

PMID:
24450520
4.

Informing the Design of Direct-to-Consumer Interactive Personal Genomics Reports.

Shaer O, Nov O, Okerlund J, Balestra M, Stowell E, Ascher L, Bi J, Schlenker C, Ball M.

J Med Internet Res. 2015 Jun 12;17(6):e146. doi: 10.2196/jmir.4415.

5.

Consumer Perceptions of Interactions With Primary Care Providers After Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing.

van der Wouden CH, Carere DA, Maitland-van der Zee AH, Ruffin MT 4th, Roberts JS, Green RC; Impact of Personal Genomics Study Group.

Ann Intern Med. 2016 Apr 19;164(8):513-22. doi: 10.7326/M15-0995. Epub 2016 Mar 1.

PMID:
26928821
6.

Consumer use and response to online third-party raw DNA interpretation services.

Wang C, Cahill TJ, Parlato A, Wertz B, Zhong Q, Cunningham TN, Cummings JJ.

Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2018 Jan;6(1):35-43. doi: 10.1002/mgg3.340. Epub 2017 Nov 2.

7.

"Bridge to the Literature"? Third-Party Genetic Interpretation Tools and the Views of Tool Developers.

Nelson SC, Fullerton SM.

J Genet Couns. 2018 Aug;27(4):770-781. doi: 10.1007/s10897-018-0217-9. Epub 2018 Feb 7.

PMID:
29411211
9.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: User Motivations, Decision Making, and Perceived Utility of Results.

Roberts JS, Gornick MC, Carere DA, Uhlmann WR, Ruffin MT, Green RC.

Public Health Genomics. 2017;20(1):36-45. doi: 10.1159/000455006. Epub 2017 Jan 10.

10.

"It's our DNA, we deserve the right to test!" A content analysis of a petition for the right to access direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Su Y, Borry P, Otte IC, Howard HC.

Per Med. 2013 Sep;10(7):729-739. doi: 10.2217/pme.13.69.

PMID:
29768761
11.

Experiences of early users of direct-to-consumer genomics in Switzerland: an exploratory study.

Vayena E, Gourna E, Streuli J, Hafen E, Prainsack B.

Public Health Genomics. 2012;15(6):352-62. doi: 10.1159/000343792. Epub 2012 Nov 15.

12.

Primary care providers' experiences with and perceptions of personalized genomic medicine.

Carroll JC, Makuwaza T, Manca DP, Sopcak N, Permaul JA, O'Brien MA, Heisey R, Eisenhauer EA, Easley J, Krzyzanowska MK, Miedema B, Pruthi S, Sawka C, Schneider N, Sussman J, Urquhart R, Versaevel C, Grunfeld E.

Can Fam Physician. 2016 Oct;62(10):e626-e635.

13.

Social networkers' attitudes toward direct-to-consumer personal genome testing.

McGuire AL, Diaz CM, Wang T, Hilsenbeck SG.

Am J Bioeth. 2009;9(6-7):3-10. doi: 10.1080/15265160902928209. Erratum in: Am J Bioeth. 2009 Aug;9(8):77.

14.

Effect of comprehensive oncogenetics training interventions for general practitioners, evaluated at multiple performance levels.

Houwink EJ, Muijtjens AM, van Teeffelen SR, Henneman L, Rethans JJ, Jacobi F, van der Jagt L, Stirbu I, van Luijk SJ, Stumpel CT, Meijers-Heijboer HE, van der Vleuten C, Cornel MC, Dinant GJ.

PLoS One. 2015 Apr 2;10(4):e0122648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122648. eCollection 2015.

15.

Diet and exercise changes following direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing.

Nielsen DE, Carere DA, Wang C, Roberts JS, Green RC; PGen Study Group.

BMC Med Genomics. 2017 May 2;10(1):24. doi: 10.1186/s12920-017-0258-1.

16.

Adopting genetics: motivations and outcomes of personal genomic testing in adult adoptees.

Baptista NM, Christensen KD, Carere DA, Broadley SA, Roberts JS, Green RC.

Genet Med. 2016 Sep;18(9):924-32. doi: 10.1038/gim.2015.192. Epub 2016 Jan 28.

17.

The impact of raw DNA availability and corresponding online interpretation services: A mixed-methods study.

Allen CG, Gabriel J, Flynn M, Cunningham TN, Wang C.

Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):105-112. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx009.

PMID:
29385579
18.

Utilization of Genetic Counseling after Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study.

Koeller DR, Uhlmann WR, Carere DA, Green RC, Roberts JS; PGen Study Group.

J Genet Couns. 2017 Dec;26(6):1270-1279. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0106-7. Epub 2017 May 16.

19.

Prescription medication changes following direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing: findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics (PGen) Study.

Carere DA, VanderWeele TJ, Vassy JL, van der Wouden CH, Roberts JS, Kraft P, Green RC.

Genet Med. 2017 May;19(5):537-545. doi: 10.1038/gim.2016.141. Epub 2016 Sep 22.

20.

Implementation of evidence-based knowledge inĀ general practice.

Le JV.

Dan Med J. 2017 Dec;64(12). pii: B5405.

PMID:
29206099

Supplemental Content

Support Center