The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Adoption of Pharmacogenomic Testing by US Physicians: Results of a Nationwide Survey
Abstract
To develop a benchmark measure of US physicians' level of knowledge and extent of use of pharmacogenomic testing, we conducted an anonymous, cross-sectional, fax-based, national survey. Of 397,832 physicians receiving the survey questionnaire, 10,303 (3%) completed and returned it; the respondents were representative of the overall US physician population. The factors associated with the decision to test were evaluated using χ(2) and multivariate logistic regression. Overall, 97.6% of responding physicians agreed that genetic variations may influence drug response, but only 10.3% felt adequately informed about pharmacogenomic testing. Only 12.9% of physicians had ordered a test in the previous 6 months, and 26.4% anticipated ordering a test in the next 6 months. Early and future adopters of testing were more likely to have received training in pharmacogenomics, but only 29.0% of physicians overall had received any education in the field. Our findings highlight the need for more effective physician education on the clinical value, availability, and interpretation of pharmacogenomic tests.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Arar, N., Seo, J., Abboud, H. E., Parchman, M., & Noel, P. (2010) · Personalized Medicine · doi:10.2217/pme.10.47 · Cited by 11
Cited by
McClaren, B. J., Crellin, E., Janinski, M., Nisselle, A. E., Ng, L., Metcalfe, S. A., & Gaff, C. L. (2020) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2020.00151 · Cited by 89
Alexander, K. M., Divine, H. S., Hanna, C. R., Gokun, Y., & Freeman, P. R. (2014) · Journal of the American Pharmacists Association · doi:10.1331/japha.2014.13041 · Cited by 59
Kichko, K., Marschall, P., & Flessa, S. (2016) · Journal of Personalized Medicine · doi:10.3390/jpm6020015 · Cited by 36
Racial Differences in Attitudes toward Personalized Medicine
Diaz, V. A., Mainous III, A. G., Gavin, J. K., & Wilson, D. (2014) · Public Health Genomics · doi:10.1159/000354785 · Cited by 36
Beyond the Clinic: ‘Direct-to-Consumer‘ Genomic Profiling Services and Pharmacogenomics
Prainsack, B., & Vayena, E. (2013) · Pharmacogenomics · doi:10.2217/pgs.13.10 · Cited by 35
The Role of Hospital Pharmacists in the Adoption and Use of Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine
Schwartz, E. J., & Issa, A. M. (2017) · Personalized Medicine · doi:10.2217/pme-2016-0063 · Cited by 29
Views on Precision Medicine among Health Professionals in Korea: A Mixed Methods Study
Cho, H. N., Shin, S.-Y., Hwangbo, B., Chang, Y. J., Cho, J., Kong, S.-Y., Choi, K. S., & Lee, E. S. (2020) · Yonsei Medical Journal · doi:10.3349/ymj.2020.61.2.192 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Stanek, E. J., Sanders, C. L., Taber, K. A. J., Khalid, M., Patel, A., Verbrugge, R. R., Agatep, B. C., Aubert, R. E., Epstein, R. S., & Frueh, F. W.
- Venue
- Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-01-25
- Volume
- 91
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 450-458
- ISSN
- 0009-9236 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-6535
- OpenAlex
- W2085132047
- Cited by
- 428
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 37.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
