BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Cited by in F6Publishing
For: Yu JH, Harrell TM, Jamal SM, Tabor HK, Bamshad MJ. Attitudes of genetics professionals toward the return of incidental results from exome and whole-genome sequencing. Am J Hum Genet 2014;95:77-84. [PMID: 24975944 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.06.004] [Cited by in Crossref: 83] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 85] [Article Influence: 10.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
Number Citing Articles
1 Hofmann B. Incidental findings of uncertain significance: To know or not to know--that is not the question. BMC Med Ethics 2016;17:13. [PMID: 26873084 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-016-0096-2] [Cited by in Crossref: 21] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 19] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
2 Sanderson SC, Hill M, Patch C, Searle B, Lewis C, Chitty LS. Delivering genome sequencing in clinical practice: an interview study with healthcare professionals involved in the 100 000 Genomes Project. BMJ Open 2019;9:e029699. [PMID: 31685495 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-029699] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
3 Anderson JA, Meyn MS, Shuman C, Zlotnik Shaul R, Mantella LE, Szego MJ, Bowdin S, Monfared N, Hayeems RZ. Parents perspectives on whole genome sequencing for their children: qualified enthusiasm? J Med Ethics 2017;43:535-9. [PMID: 27888232 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103564] [Cited by in Crossref: 35] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
4 Hofstatter E, Mehra K, Yushak M, Pusztai L. Tumor profiling and the incidentalome: patient decisions and risks. Future Oncology 2015;11:3299-305. [DOI: 10.2217/fon.15.260] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
5 Rost C, Dent KM, Botkin J, Rothwell E. Experiences and lessons learned by genetic counselors in returning secondary genetic findings to patients. J Genet Couns 2020;29:1234-44. [PMID: 32453499 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1292] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
6 Katsanis SH, Minear MA, Vorderstrasse A, Yang N, Reeves JW, Rakhra-Burris T, Cook-Deegan R, Ginsburg GS, Simmons LA. Perspectives on genetic and genomic technologies in an academic medical center: the duke experience. J Pers Med 2015;5:67-82. [PMID: 25854543 DOI: 10.3390/jpm5020067] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
7 Kost RG, Poppel SM, Coller BS. Informed consent for next-generation nucleotide sequencing studies: Aiding communication between participants and investigators. J Clin Transl Sci 2017;1:115-20. [PMID: 28649453 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2016.21] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
8 Ackerman SL, Koenig BA. Understanding variations in secondary findings reporting practices across U.S. genome sequencing laboratories. AJOB Empirical Bioethics 2017;9:48-57. [DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2017.1405095] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
9 Kuiper JM, Borry P, Vears DF, Van Hoyweghen I. The social shaping of a diagnosis in Next Generation Sequencing. New Genetics and Society 2021;40:425-48. [DOI: 10.1080/14636778.2020.1853514] [Reference Citation Analysis]
10 Darnell AJ, Austin H, Bluemke DA, Cannon RO 3rd, Fischbeck K, Gahl W, Goldman D, Grady C, Greene MH, Holland SM, Hull SC, Porter FD, Resnik D, Rubinstein WS, Biesecker LG. A Clinical Service to Support the Return of Secondary Genomic Findings in Human Research. Am J Hum Genet 2016;98:435-41. [PMID: 26942283 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.01.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 19] [Article Influence: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
11 Fiore RN, Goodman KW. Precision medicine ethics: selected issues and developments in next-generation sequencing, clinical oncology, and ethics. Curr Opin Oncol 2016;28:83-7. [PMID: 26569425 DOI: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000247] [Cited by in Crossref: 28] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
12 Mcveigh TP, Sweeney KJ, Kerin MJ, Gallagher DJ. A qualitative analysis of the attitudes of Irish patients towards participation in genetic-based research. Ir J Med Sci 2016;185:825-31. [DOI: 10.1007/s11845-015-1373-7] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
13 Hicks JK, Shealy A, Schreiber A, Coleridge M, Noss R, Natowicz M, Moran R, Moss T, Erwin A, Eng C. Patient Decisions to Receive Secondary Pharmacogenomic Findings and Development of a Multidisciplinary Practice Model to Integrate Results Into Patient Care. Clin Transl Sci 2018;11:71-6. [PMID: 28749586 DOI: 10.1111/cts.12493] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
14 Ploug T, Holm S. Clinical genome sequencing and population preferences for information about 'incidental' findings-From medically actionable genes (MAGs) to patient actionable genes (PAGs). PLoS One 2017;12:e0179935. [PMID: 28671958 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0179935] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
15 Hurlimann T, Jaitovich Groisman I, Godard B. Exploring neurologists' perspectives on the return of next generation sequencing results to their patients: a needed step in the development of guidelines. BMC Med Ethics 2018;19:81. [PMID: 30268121 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-018-0320-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
16 Roche MI, Berg JS. Incidental Findings with Genomic Testing: Implications for Genetic Counseling Practice. Curr Genet Med Rep 2015;3:166-76. [PMID: 26566463 DOI: 10.1007/s40142-015-0075-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 57] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 48] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
17 Seiffert DJ, McCarthy Veach P, LeRoy B, Guan W, Zierhut H. Beyond medical actionability: Public perceptions of important actions in response to hypothetical genetic testing results. J Genet Couns 2019;28:355-66. [PMID: 30710467 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1048] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
18 Green RC, Goddard KAB, Jarvik GP, Amendola LM, Appelbaum PS, Berg JS, Bernhardt BA, Biesecker LG, Biswas S, Blout CL, Bowling KM, Brothers KB, Burke W, Caga-Anan CF, Chinnaiyan AM, Chung WK, Clayton EW, Cooper GM, East K, Evans JP, Fullerton SM, Garraway LA, Garrett JR, Gray SW, Henderson GE, Hindorff LA, Holm IA, Lewis MH, Hutter CM, Janne PA, Joffe S, Kaufman D, Knoppers BM, Koenig BA, Krantz ID, Manolio TA, McCullough L, McEwen J, McGuire A, Muzny D, Myers RM, Nickerson DA, Ou J, Parsons DW, Petersen GM, Plon SE, Rehm HL, Roberts JS, Robinson D, Salama JS, Scollon S, Sharp RR, Shirts B, Spinner NB, Tabor HK, Tarczy-Hornoch P, Veenstra DL, Wagle N, Weck K, Wilfond BS, Wilhelmsen K, Wolf SM, Wynn J, Yu JH; CSER Consortium. Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine. Am J Hum Genet 2016;98:1051-66. [PMID: 27181682 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.04.011] [Cited by in Crossref: 92] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 86] [Article Influence: 15.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
19 Boeldt DL, Cheung C, Ariniello L, Darst BF, Topol S, Schork NJ, Philis-Tsimikas A, Torkamani A, Fortmann AL, Bloss CS. Patient perspectives on whole-genome sequencing for undiagnosed diseases. Per Med 2017;14:17-25. [PMID: 29749824 DOI: 10.2217/pme-2016-0050] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
20 Pillar N, Isakov O, Weissglas-Volkov D, Botchan S, Friedman E, Arber N, Shomron N. Actionable clinical decisions based on comprehensive genomic evaluation in asymptomatic adults. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2015;3:433-9. [PMID: 26436109 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.154] [Cited by in Crossref: 6] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis]
21 Rosier M, Guedj M, Calvas P, Julia S, Garnier C, Cambon-Thomsen A, Muñoz Sastre MT. Attitudes of French populations towards the disclosure of unsolicited findings in medical genetics. J Health Psychol 2021;26:1767-79. [PMID: 31707852 DOI: 10.1177/1359105319886622] [Reference Citation Analysis]
22 Sun Y, Ruivenkamp CA, Hoffer MJ, Vrijenhoek T, Kriek M, van Asperen CJ, den Dunnen JT, Santen GW. Next-generation diagnostics: gene panel, exome, or whole genome? Hum Mutat 2015;36:648-55. [PMID: 25772376 DOI: 10.1002/humu.22783] [Cited by in Crossref: 94] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 76] [Article Influence: 13.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
23 Jiang S, Anis AH, Cromwell I, Mohammadi T, Schrader KA, Lucas J, Armour CM, Clausen M, Bombard Y, Regier DA. Health-care practitioners' preferences for the return of secondary findings from next-generation sequencing: a discrete choice experiment. Genet Med 2020;22:2011-9. [PMID: 32820245 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0927-x] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
24 Tabor HK, Auer PL, Jamal SM, Chong JX, Yu JH, Gordon AS, Graubert TA, O'Donnell CJ, Rich SS, Nickerson DA, Bamshad MJ; NHLBI Exome Sequencing Project. Pathogenic variants for Mendelian and complex traits in exomes of 6,517 European and African Americans: implications for the return of incidental results. Am J Hum Genet 2014;95:183-93. [PMID: 25087612 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.07.006] [Cited by in Crossref: 58] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 60] [Article Influence: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
25 Clift KE, Halverson CM, Fiksdal AS, Kumbamu A, Sharp RR, McCormick JB. Patients' views on incidental findings from clinical exome sequencing. Appl Transl Genom 2015;4:38-43. [PMID: 26937348 DOI: 10.1016/j.atg.2015.02.005] [Cited by in Crossref: 63] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 55] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
26 Sundby A, Boolsen MW, Burgdorf KS, Ullum H, Hansen TF, Middleton A, Mors O. Stakeholders in psychiatry and their attitudes toward receiving pertinent and incident findings in genomic research. Am J Med Genet A 2017;173:2649-58. [PMID: 28817238 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.38380] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
27 Lewis KL, Hooker GW, Connors PD, Hyams TC, Wright MF, Caldwell S, Biesecker LG, Biesecker BB. Participant use and communication of findings from exome sequencing: a mixed-methods study. Genet Med 2016;18:577-83. [PMID: 26540156 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.133] [Cited by in Crossref: 45] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 45] [Article Influence: 6.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
28 Scheuner MT, Peredo J, Benkendorf J, Bowdish B, Feldman G, Fleisher L, Mulvihill JJ, Watson M, Herman GE, Evans J. Reporting genomic secondary findings: ACMG members weigh in. Genet Med 2015;17:27-35. [PMID: 25394173 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.165] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
29 Sabatello M, Zhang Y, Chen Y, Appelbaum PS. In Different Voices: The Views of People with Disabilities about Return of Results from Precision Medicine Research. Public Health Genomics 2020;23:42-53. [PMID: 32294660 DOI: 10.1159/000506599] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
30 Christensen KD, Roberts JS, Whitehouse PJ, Royal CD, Obisesan TO, Cupples LA, Vernarelli JA, Bhatt DL, Linnenbringer E, Butson MB, Fasaye GA, Uhlmann WR, Hiraki S, Wang N, Cook-Deegan R, Green RC; REVEAL Study Group*. Disclosing Pleiotropic Effects During Genetic Risk Assessment for Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:155-63. [PMID: 26810768 DOI: 10.7326/M15-0187] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16] [Article Influence: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
31 Roche MI, Griesemer I, Khan CM, Moore E, Lin FC, O'Daniel JM, Foreman AKM, Lee K, Powell BC, Berg JS, Evans JP, Henderson GE, Rini C. Factors influencing NCGENES research participants' requests for non-medically actionable secondary findings. Genet Med 2019;21:1092-9. [PMID: 30237575 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-018-0294-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 6] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
32 Ormondroyd E, Mackley MP, Blair E, Craft J, Knight JC, Taylor JC, Taylor J, Watkins H. "Not pathogenic until proven otherwise": perspectives of UK clinical genomics professionals toward secondary findings in context of a Genomic Medicine Multidisciplinary Team and the 100,000 Genomes Project. Genet Med 2018;20:320-8. [PMID: 29261176 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.157] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
33 Vears DF, Sénécal K, Borry P. Reporting practices for unsolicited and secondary findings from next-generation sequencing technologies: Perspectives of laboratory personnel. Hum Mutat 2017;38:905-11. [PMID: 28512758 DOI: 10.1002/humu.23259] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 21] [Article Influence: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
34 Christensen KD, Vassy JL, Phillips KA, Blout CL, Azzariti DR, Lu CY, Robinson JO, Lee K, Douglas MP, Yeh JM, Machini K, Stout NK, Rehm HL, McGuire AL, Green RC, Dukhovny D; MedSeq Project. Short-term costs of integrating whole-genome sequencing into primary care and cardiology settings: a pilot randomized trial. Genet Med 2018;20:1544-53. [PMID: 29565423 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2018.35] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
35 Erzurumluoglu AM, Alsaadi MM, Rodriguez S, Alotaibi TS, Guthrie PA, Lewis S, Ginwalla A, Gaunt TR, Alharbi KK, Alsaif FM, Alsaadi BM, Day IN. Proxy molecular diagnosis from whole-exome sequencing reveals Papillon-Lefevre syndrome caused by a missense mutation in CTSC. PLoS One 2015;10:e0121351. [PMID: 25799584 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121351] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
36 Yushak ML, Han G, Bouberhan S, Epstein L, DiGiovanna MP, Mougalian SS, Sanft TB, Abu-Khalaf MM, Chung GG, Stein SM, Goldberg SB, Pusztai L, Hofstatter EW. Patient preferences regarding incidental genomic findings discovered during tumor profiling. Cancer 2016;122:1588-97. [PMID: 26970385 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.29951] [Cited by in Crossref: 29] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
37 Korngiebel DM, West KM, Burke W. Clinician-Stakeholders' Perspectives on Using Patient Portals to Return Lynch Syndrome Screening Results. J Genet Couns 2018;27:349-57. [PMID: 29159545 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0179-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 5] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
38 Jamuar SS, Kuan JL, Brett M, Tiang Z, Tan WL, Lim JY, Liew WK, Javed A, Liew WK, Law HY, Tan ES, Lai A, Ng I, Teo YY, Venkatesh B, Reversade B, Tan EC, Foo R. Incidentalome from Genomic Sequencing: A Barrier to Personalized Medicine? EBioMedicine 2016;5:211-6. [PMID: 27077130 DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.01.030] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 13] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
39 Lemke AA, Harris-Wai JN. Stakeholder engagement in policy development: challenges and opportunities for human genomics. Genet Med 2015;17:949-57. [PMID: 25764215 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.8] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 25] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
40 Leo MC, McMullen C, Wilfond BS, Lynch FL, Reiss JA, Gilmore MJ, Himes P, Kauffman TL, Davis JV, Jarvik GP, Berg JS, Harding C, Kennedy KA, Simpson DK, Quigley DI, Richards CS, Rope AF, Goddard KA. Patients' ratings of genetic conditions validate a taxonomy to simplify decisions about preconception carrier screening via genome sequencing. Am J Med Genet A 2016;170:574-82. [PMID: 26792268 DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.37477] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
41 Tabor HK, Jamal SM, Yu JH, Crouch JM, Shankar AG, Dent KM, Anderson N, Miller DA, Futral BT, Bamshad MJ. My46: a Web-based tool for self-guided management of genomic test results in research and clinical settings. Genet Med 2017;19:467-75. [PMID: 27632689 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.133] [Cited by in Crossref: 22] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
42 Gornick MC, Cobain E, Le LQ, Bartnik N, Stoffel E, Schuetze S, Talpaz M, Chinnaiyan A, Roberts JS; Michigan Oncology Sequencing Study. Oncologists' Use of Genomic Sequencing Data to Inform Clinical Management. JCO Precis Oncol 2018;2:PO. [PMID: 32914003 DOI: 10.1200/PO.17.00122] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
43 Halverson CM, Clift KE, McCormick JB. Was it worth it? Patients' perspectives on the perceived value of genomic-based individualized medicine. J Community Genet 2016;7:145-52. [PMID: 26860291 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-016-0260-x] [Cited by in Crossref: 26] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 23] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
44 Sundby A, Boolsen MW, Burgdorf KS, Ullum H, Hansen TF, Mors O. Attitudes of stakeholders in psychiatry towards the inclusion of children in genomic research. Hum Genomics 2018;12:12. [PMID: 29506557 DOI: 10.1186/s40246-018-0144-8] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
45 Tan-Koi WC, Kapoor R, Teo YY. Pharmacogenetics through a public health lens: from policy to practice. Pharmacogenet Genomics 2015;25:518-20. [PMID: 26325520 DOI: 10.1097/FPC.0000000000000159] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
46 Bishop C, Strong K, Dimmock D. Choices of incidental findings of individuals undergoing genome wide sequencing, a single center's experience: Choices of incidental findings of individuals undergoing genome wide sequencing. Clin Genet 2017;91:137-40. [DOI: 10.1111/cge.12829] [Cited by in Crossref: 19] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
47 Zhu X, Basappa SN, Ridgeway JL, Albertie ML, Pantoja E, Prescott D, Radecki Breitkopf C. Perspectives regarding family disclosure of genetic research results in three racial and ethnic minority populations. J Community Genet 2020;11:433-43. [PMID: 32562160 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-020-00472-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
48 Lee H, Deignan JL, Dorrani N, Strom SP, Kantarci S, Quintero-Rivera F, Das K, Toy T, Harry B, Yourshaw M, Fox M, Fogel BL, Martinez-Agosto JA, Wong DA, Chang VY, Shieh PB, Palmer CG, Dipple KM, Grody WW, Vilain E, Nelson SF. Clinical exome sequencing for genetic identification of rare Mendelian disorders. JAMA 2014;312:1880-7. [PMID: 25326637 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.14604] [Cited by in Crossref: 612] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 559] [Article Influence: 76.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
49 Janssens ACJW, Evans JP. Returning pharmacogenetic secondary findings from genome sequencing: let’s not put the cart before the horse. Genet Med 2015;17:854-6. [DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.59] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
50 He Y, Li D. Incidental prenatal detection of DMD gene deletion using array comparative genomic hybridization. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2016;203:338-40. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.05.038] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1] [Article Influence: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
51 Wang X, Wang Y, Hong D, Zhang Z, Li Y, Yang P, Sun Y, Jiang T, Xu Z. Combined genetic screening and traditional biochemical screening to optimize newborn screening systems. Clinica Chimica Acta 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.cca.2022.01.015] [Reference Citation Analysis]
52 Tolusso LK, Collins K, Zhang X, Holle JR, Valencia CA, Myers MF. Pediatric Whole Exome Sequencing: an Assessment of Parents’ Perceived and Actual Understanding. J Genet Counsel 2017;26:792-805. [DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-0052-9] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
53 Wade CH, Elliott KR. Preferences for the provision of whole genome sequencing services among young adults. PLoS One 2017;12:e0174131. [PMID: 28334023 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174131] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
54 Loud JT, Bremer RC, Mai PL, Peters JA, Giri N, Stewart DR, Greene MH, Alter BP, Savage SA. Research participant interest in primary, secondary, and incidental genomic findings. Genet Med 2016;18:1218-25. [PMID: 27101135 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.36] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
55 Johnson LM, Hamilton KV, Valdez JM, Knapp E, Baker JN, Nichols KE. Ethical considerations surrounding germline next-generation sequencing of children with cancer. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2017;17:523-34. [PMID: 28399664 DOI: 10.1080/14737159.2017.1316665] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 12] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
56 Christensen KD, Dukhovny D, Siebert U, Green RC. Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing. J Pers Med 2015;5:470-86. [PMID: 26690481 DOI: 10.3390/jpm5040470] [Cited by in Crossref: 57] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 52] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
57 Wynn J, Martinez J, Duong J, Chiuzan C, Phelan JC, Fyer A, Klitzman RL, Appelbaum PS, Chung WK. Research Participants’ Preferences for Hypothetical Secondary Results from Genomic Research. J Genet Counsel 2017;26:841-51. [DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-0059-2] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
58 Sanderson SC, Lewis C, Patch C, Hill M, Bitner-Glindzicz M, Chitty LS. Opening the "black box" of informed consent appointments for genome sequencing: a multisite observational study. Genet Med 2019;21:1083-91. [PMID: 30270361 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-018-0310-3] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
59 Barajas M, Ross LF. Pediatric Professionals' Attitudes about Secondary Findings in Genomic Sequencing of Children. The Journal of Pediatrics 2015;166:1276-1282.e7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2015.01.032] [Cited by in Crossref: 9] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
60 Heaton TJ, Chico V. Attitudes towards the sharing of genetic information with at-risk relatives: results of a quantitative survey. Hum Genet 2016;135:109-20. [PMID: 26612611 DOI: 10.1007/s00439-015-1612-z] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
61 Adam S, Friedman JM. Controversy and debate on clinical genomics sequencing-paper 2: clinical genome-wide sequencing: don't throw out the baby with the bathwater! J Clin Epidemiol 2017;92:7-10. [PMID: 28916491 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.020] [Reference Citation Analysis]
62 Nilsson MP, Emmertz M, Kristoffersson U, Borg Å, Larsson C, Rehn M, Winter C, Saal LH, Brandberg Y, Loman N. Germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 incidentally revealed in a biobank research study: experiences from re-contacting mutation carriers and relatives. J Community Genet 2018;9:201-8. [PMID: 29082482 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-017-0341-5] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
63 Sundby A, Boolsen MW, Burgdorf KS, Ullum H, Hansen TF, Middleton A, Mors O. The preferences of potential stakeholders in psychiatric genomic research regarding consent procedures and information delivery. Eur Psychiatry 2019;55:29-35. [PMID: 30384109 DOI: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2018.09.005] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
64 Brew CE, Castro BA, Pan V, Hart A, Blumberg B, Wicklund C. Genetics professionals' attitudes toward prenatal exome sequencing. J Genet Couns 2019;28:229-39. [PMID: 30888706 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1112] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 4] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
65 Berg JS, Powell CM. Potential Uses and Inherent Challenges of Using Genome-Scale Sequencing to Augment Current Newborn Screening. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2015;5:a023150. [PMID: 26438605 DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a023150] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 20] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
66 Ryan KA, De Vries RG, Uhlmann WR, Roberts JS, Gornick MC. Public's Views toward Return of Secondary Results in Genomic Sequencing: It's (Almost) All about the Choice. J Genet Couns 2017;26:1197-212. [PMID: 28357777 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-017-0095-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 10] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 10] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
67 Joshi E, Mighton C, Clausen M, Casalino S, Kim THM, Kowal C, Birken C, Maguire JL, Bombard Y. Primary care provider perspectives on using genomic sequencing in the care of healthy children. Eur J Hum Genet 2020;28:551-7. [PMID: 31804631 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-019-0547-6] [Cited by in Crossref: 1] [Article Influence: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
68 Shkedi-Rafid S, Dheensa S, Crawford G, Fenwick A, Lucassen A. Defining and managing incidental findings in genetic and genomic practice. J Med Genet 2014;51:715-23. [PMID: 25228303 DOI: 10.1136/jmedgenet-2014-102435] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
69 Kalynchuk EJ, Althouse A, Parker LS, Saller DN Jr, Rajkovic A. Prenatal whole-exome sequencing: parental attitudes. Prenat Diagn 2015;35:1030-6. [PMID: 26151551 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4635] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis]
70 Umbach N, Beißbarth T, Bleckmann A, Duttge G, Flatau L, König A, Kuhn J, Perera-bel J, Roschauer J, Schulze T, Schweda M, Urban A, Zimmermann A, Sax U. Clinical application of genomic high-throughput data: Infrastructural, ethical, legal and psychosocial aspects. European Neuropsychopharmacology 2020;31:1-15. [DOI: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2019.09.008] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
71 Appelbaum PS, Fyer A, Klitzman RL, Martinez J, Parens E, Zhang Y, Chung WK. Researchers' views on informed consent for return of secondary results in genomic research. Genet Med 2015;17:644-50. [PMID: 25503499 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2014.163] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 14] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
72 Christensen KD, Schonman EF, Robinson JO, Roberts JS, Diamond PM, Lee KB, Green RC, McGuire AL. Behavioral and psychological impact of genome sequencing: a pilot randomized trial of primary care and cardiology patients. NPJ Genom Med 2021;6:72. [PMID: 34429410 DOI: 10.1038/s41525-021-00236-2] [Reference Citation Analysis]
73 Gaieski JB, Patrick-Miller L, Egleston BL, Maxwell KN, Walser S, DiGiovanni L, Brower J, Fetzer D, Ganzak A, McKenna D, Long JM, Powers J, Stopfer JE, Nathanson KL, Domchek SM, Bradbury AR. Research participants' experiences with return of genetic research results and preferences for web-based alternatives. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2019;7:e898. [PMID: 31376244 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.898] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 9] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
74 Fernandez CV, O'Rourke PP, Beskow LM. Canadian Research Ethics Board Leadership Attitudes to the Return of Genetic Research Results to Individuals and Their Families. J Law Med Ethics 2015;43:514-22. [PMID: 26479560 DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12293] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
75 Lacaze P, Ryan J, Woods R, Winship I, McNeil J. Pathogenic variants in the healthy elderly: unique ethical and practical challenges. J Med Ethics 2017;43:714-22. [PMID: 28341755 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103967] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]
76 Manolio TA, Rowley R, Williams MS, Roden D, Ginsburg GS, Bult C, Chisholm RL, Deverka PA, McLeod HL, Mensah GA, Relling MV, Rodriguez LL, Tamburro C, Green ED. Opportunities, resources, and techniques for implementing genomics in clinical care. Lancet 2019;394:511-20. [PMID: 31395439 DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31140-7] [Cited by in Crossref: 29] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 13] [Article Influence: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis]
77 Parikh R, O'Keefe L, Salowe R, Mccoskey M, Pan W, Sankar P, Miller-Ellis E, Addis V, Lehman A, Maguire M, O'Brien J. Factors associated with participation by African Americans in a study of the genetics of glaucoma. Ethn Health 2019;24:694-704. [PMID: 28669230 DOI: 10.1080/13557858.2017.1346189] [Cited by in Crossref: 4] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 5] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
78 Delanne J, Nambot S, Chassagne A, Putois O, Pelissier A, Peyron C, Gautier E, Thevenon J, Cretin E, Bruel AL, Goussot V, Ghiringhelli F, Boidot R, Tran Mau-Them F, Philippe C, Vitobello A, Demougeot L, Vernin C, Lapointe AS, Bardou M, Luu M, Binquet C, Lejeune C, Joly L, Juif C, Baurand A, Sawka C, Bertolone G, Duffourd Y, Sanlaville D, Pujol P, Geneviève D, Houdayer F, Thauvin-Robinet C, Faivre L. Secondary findings from whole-exome/genome sequencing evaluating stakeholder perspectives. A review of the literature. Eur J Med Genet 2019;62:103529. [PMID: 30165243 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmg.2018.08.010] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis]
79 Smith LA, Douglas J, Braxton AA, Kramer K. Reporting Incidental Findings in Clinical Whole Exome Sequencing: Incorporation of the 2013 ACMG Recommendations into Current Practices of Genetic Counseling. J Genet Couns 2015;24:654-62. [PMID: 25403901 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-014-9794-4] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 18] [Article Influence: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis]
80 Petersen I, Kaatsch P, Spix C, Kollek R. Return and Disclosure of Research Results: Parental Attitudes and Needs Over Time in Pediatric Oncology. J Pediatr 2017;191:232-7. [PMID: 28969889 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2017.08.008] [Cited by in Crossref: 2] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 2] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis]
81 Porter KM, Kauffman TL, Koenig BA, Lewis KL, Rehm HL, Richards CS, Strande NT, Tabor HK, Wolf SM, Yang Y, Amendola LM, Azzariti DR, Berg JS, Bergstrom K, Biesecker LG, Biswas S, Bowling KM, Chung WK, Clayton EW, Conlin LK, Cooper GM, Dulik MC, Garraway LA, Ghazani AA, Green RC, Hiatt SM, Jamal SM, Jarvik GP, Goddard KAB, Wilfond BS; members of the CSER Actionability and Return of Results Working Group. Approaches to carrier testing and results disclosure in translational genomics research: The clinical sequencing exploratory research consortium experience. Mol Genet Genomic Med 2018;6:898-909. [PMID: 30133189 DOI: 10.1002/mgg3.453] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 7] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
82 Mackley MP, Fletcher B, Parker M, Watkins H, Ormondroyd E. Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies. Genet Med 2017;19:283-93. [PMID: 27584911 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2016.109] [Cited by in Crossref: 74] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 70] [Article Influence: 12.3] [Reference Citation Analysis]
83 Yamamoto K, Hachiya T, Fukushima A, Nakaya N, Okayama A, Tanno K, Aizawa F, Tokutomi T, Hozawa A, Shimizu A. Population-based biobank participants' preferences for receiving genetic test results. J Hum Genet 2017;62:1037-48. [PMID: 28794501 DOI: 10.1038/jhg.2017.81] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis]
84 Peyron C, Pélissier A, Béjean S. Preference heterogeneity with respect to whole genome sequencing. A discrete choice experiment among parents of children with rare genetic diseases. Social Science & Medicine 2018;214:125-32. [DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.08.015] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis]
85 Middleton A, Morley KI, Bragin E, Firth HV, Hurles ME, Wright CF, Parker M; DDD study. Attitudes of nearly 7000 health professionals, genomic researchers and publics toward the return of incidental results from sequencing research. Eur J Hum Genet 2016;24:21-9. [PMID: 25920556 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.58] [Cited by in Crossref: 116] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 107] [Article Influence: 16.6] [Reference Citation Analysis]