Literature DB >> 20395690

Debating clinical utility.

Wylie Burke1, A-M Laberge, N Press.   

Abstract

The clinical utility of genetic tests is determined by the outcomes following test use. Like other measures of value, it is often contested. Stakeholders may have different views about benefits and risks and about the importance of social versus health outcomes. They also commonly disagree about the evidence needed to determine whether a test is effective in achieving a specific outcome. Questions may be presented as factual disagreements, when they are actually debates about what information matters or how facts should be interpreted and used in clinical decision-making. Defining the different issues at stake is therefore an important element of policy-making. Key issues include evidence standards for test use, and in particular, the circumstances under which prospective controlled data should be required, as well as evidence on feasibility, cost and equitable delivery of testing; the goals of population-based screening programs, and in particular, the role of social outcomes in evaluating test value; and the appropriate uses and funding of tests that inform non-medical actions. Addressing each of these issues requires attention to stakeholder values and methods for effective deliberation that incorporate consumer as well as health professional perspectives. Copyright 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20395690      PMCID: PMC2865394          DOI: 10.1159/000279623

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  69 in total

1.  Systems biology and new technologies enable predictive and preventative medicine.

Authors:  Leroy Hood; James R Heath; Michael E Phelps; Biaoyang Lin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-10-22       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  From public health emergency to public health service: the implications of evolving criteria for newborn screening panels.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse; Coleen A Boyle; Aileen Kenneson; Muin J Khoury; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Hormone replacement therapy comes full circle.

Authors:  Helen Roberts
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2007-07-11

4.  Genetic testing for warfarin dosing? Not yet ready for prime time.

Authors:  Henry I Bussey; Ann K Wittkowsky; Elaine M Hylek; Marie B Walker
Journal:  Pharmacotherapy       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 4.705

5.  Counterpoint: genetic risk feedback for common disease time to test the waters.

Authors:  Patricia A Thompson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Responses to online GSTM1 genetic test results among smokers related to patients with lung cancer: a pilot study.

Authors:  Saskia C Sanderson; Suzanne C O'Neill; Della Brown White; Gerold Bepler; Lori Bastian; Isaac M Lipkus; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-06-30       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues.

Authors:  Stuart Hogarth; Gail Javitt; David Melzer
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 8.929

8.  Personalized medicine in the era of genomics.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; Bruce M Psaty
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-10-10       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Blazing a trail: a public health research agenda in genomics and chronic disease.

Authors:  Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2005-03-15       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 10.  Genetic testing before anticoagulation? A systematic review of pharmacogenetic dosing of warfarin.

Authors:  Kirsten Neudoerffer Kangelaris; Stephen Bent; Robert L Nussbaum; David A Garcia; Jeffrey A Tice
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2009-03-21       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  In search of biomarkers for autism: scientific, social and ethical challenges.

Authors:  Pat Walsh; Mayada Elsabbagh; Patrick Bolton; Ilina Singh
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2011-09-20       Impact factor: 34.870

2.  Charting a course for genomic medicine from base pairs to bedside.

Authors:  Eric D Green; Mark S Guyer
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-02-10       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Integrating genetic studies of nicotine addiction into public health practice: stakeholder views on challenges, barriers and opportunities.

Authors:  M J Dingel; A D Hicks; M E Robinson; B A Koenig
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 4.  Can genomic medicine improve financial sustainability of health systems?

Authors:  Christine Y Lu; Joshua P Cohen
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 4.074

5.  Parents' perceptions of the usefulness of chromosomal microarray analysis for children with autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Marian Reiff; Ellen Giarelli; Barbara A Bernhardt; Ebony Easley; Nancy B Spinner; Pamela L Sankar; Surabhi Mulchandani
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2015-10

Review 6.  Genetic architecture of colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Ulrike Peters; Stephanie Bien; Niha Zubair
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2015-07-17       Impact factor: 23.059

7.  Multigene panel testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in the province of Ontario.

Authors:  Chloe Mighton; Conxi Lazaro; Jordan Lerner-Ellis; Nicholas Watkins; Vanessa Di Gioacchino; Andrew Wong; Martin C Chang; George S Charames
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-09-03       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 8.  Living laboratory: whole-genome sequencing as a learning healthcare enterprise.

Authors:  M Angrist; L Jamal
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2014-09-06       Impact factor: 4.438

9.  A pharmacogenetic versus a clinical algorithm for warfarin dosing.

Authors:  Stephen E Kimmel; Benjamin French; Scott E Kasner; Julie A Johnson; Jeffrey L Anderson; Brian F Gage; Yves D Rosenberg; Charles S Eby; Rosemary A Madigan; Robert B McBane; Sherif Z Abdel-Rahman; Scott M Stevens; Steven Yale; Emile R Mohler; Margaret C Fang; Vinay Shah; Richard B Horenstein; Nita A Limdi; James A S Muldowney; Jaspal Gujral; Patrice Delafontaine; Robert J Desnick; Thomas L Ortel; Henny H Billett; Robert C Pendleton; Nancy L Geller; Jonathan L Halperin; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Michael D Caldwell; Robert M Califf; Jonas H Ellenberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Conveying genomic recurrence risk estimates to patients with early-stage breast cancer: oncologist perspectives.

Authors:  Elizabeth Spellman; Nadiyah Sulayman; Susan Eggly; Beth N Peshkin; Claudine Isaacs; Marc D Schwartz; Suzanne C O'Neill
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 3.894

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.