The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Participant experiences of genome sequencing for rare diseases in the 100,000 Genomes Project: a mixed methods study
Open accessAbstract
In this mixed methods study, a survey and in-depth interviews were used to explore whether decision regret and the psychological impact of receiving genome sequencing (GS) results differed between parents and patients, and between those who received a genetic diagnosis and those who did not. Participants (n = 77) completed a survey that included the Decisional Regret Scale (DRS) and an adaptation of the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) at least 12 months after consenting for GS for rare disease diagnosis in the 100,000 Genomes Project. Survey participants were invited to take part in an interview and 39 agreed; 12 with a diagnosis, 5 with variants of uncertain significance, and 19 with no pathogenic findings identified. Both survey and interview findings indicated that decision regret was low. DRS scores revealed no differences in levels of regret between parents and patients, or between those with a diagnosis and those without. Though MICRA scores indicated minimal evidence of negative psychological impacts of receiving GS results, subscale analysis revealed greater distress and uncertainty for parents compared to patients. Receiving a diagnosis was found not to influence MICRA scores, supporting interview findings of both positive and negative emotional and psychological impacts irrespective of a genetic diagnosis. Our findings have implications for policy and practice as GS is integrated into the UK and worldwide; notably, that expectation-setting is critical when offering GS, and that post-test counselling is important regardless of the GS result received, with parents perhaps needing additional emotional support.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Parents of children who did not receive a genetic diagnosis following genomic testing experienced disappointment and sadness, loss of hope, anxiety about the future, and frustration at the lack of access to genetic information and support groups.
“Research with parents of children who did not receive a genetic diagnosis following genomic testing experienced disappointment and sadness, loss of hope, anxiety about the future, and frustration at the lack of access to genetic information and support groups (Gurasashvili et al., 2023; Peter et al., 2022).”
From "I don't grieve as much as I used to": A qualitative study on parents of children with rare and undiagnosed conditions navigating grief in the context of uncertainty. (2025) · cites this paper as Peter et al., 2022
Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Living Without a Diagnosis: The Parental Experience
Lewis, C., Skirton, H., & Jones, R. (2010) · Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers · doi:10.1089/gtmb.2010.0061 · Cited by 73 · cited 1×
“For those with a no primary finding or a VUS result, frustration and disappointment were described, mirroring findings from other studies exploring the return of GS results [16, 18, 19, 34], and can be viewed as being inextricably linked with the uncertainty of living with an undiagnosed condition [35].”
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- Griffin BH, Chitty LS, Bitner-Glindzicz M. The 100 000 Genomes Project: what it means for paediatrics. Arch Dis Child Educ Pr Ed. 2017;102:105–7. · DOI
- Manickam K, McClain MR, Demmer LA, Biswas S, Kearney HM, Malinowski J, et al. Exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability: an evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021;23:2029–37. · DOI
- Wright CF, FitzPatrick DR, Firth HV. Paediatric genomics: diagnosing rare disease in children. Nat Rev Genet. 2018;19:253–68. · DOI
- Lewis C, Hammond J, Hill M, Searle B, Hunter A, Patch C, et al. Young people’s understanding, attitudes and involvement in decision-making about genome sequencing for rare diseases: a qualitative study with participants in the UK 100, 000 Genomes Project. Eur J Med Genet. 2020;63:104043. · DOI
- Dheensa S, Lucassen A, Fenwick A. Fostering trust in healthcare: participants’ experiences, views, and concerns about the 100,000 Genomes Project. Eur J Med Genet. 2019;62:335–41. · DOI
- Sanderson SC, Lewis C, Hill M, Peter M, McEntagart M, Gale D, et al. Decision-making, attitudes, and understanding among patients and relatives invited to undergo genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project: a multisite survey study. Genet Med. 2022;24:61–74. · DOI
- Robinson JO, Wynn J, Biesecker B, Biesecker LG, Bernhardt B, Brothers KB, et al. Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies. Genet Med. 2019;21:2781–90. · DOI
- Sanderson SC, Linderman MD, Suckiel SA, Zinberg R, Wasserstein M, Kasarskis A, et al. Psychological and behavioural impact of returning personal results from whole-genome sequencing: the HealthSeq project. Eur J Hum Genet. 2017;25:280–92. · DOI
- Broady KM, Ormond KE, Topol EJ, Schork NJ, Bloss CS. Predictors of adverse psychological experiences surrounding genome-wide profiling for disease risk. J Community Genet. 2018;9:217–25. · DOI
- Vassy JL, Christensen KD, Schonman EF, Blout CL, Robinson JO, Krier JB, et al. The impact of whole-genome sequencing on the primary care and outcomes of healthy adult patients: a pilot randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167:159–69. · DOI
- Skinner D, Roche MI, Weck KE, Raspberry KA, Foreman AKM, Strande NT, et al. “Possibly positive or certainly uncertain?”: participants’ responses to uncertain diagnostic results from exome sequencing. Genet Med. 2018;20:313–9. · DOI
- Li X, Nusbaum R, Smith-Hicks C, Jamal L, Dixon S, Mahida S. Caregivers’ perception of and experience with variants of uncertain significance from whole exome sequencing for children with undiagnosed conditions. J Genet Couns. 2019;28:304–12. · DOI
- Krabbenborg L, Vissers LE, Schieving J, Kleefstra T, Kamsteeg EJ, Veltman JA, et al. Understanding the psychosocial effects of WES test results on parents of children with rare diseases. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:1207–14. · DOI
- Wynn J, Ottman R, Duong J, Wilson AL, Ahimaz P, Martinez J, et al. Diagnostic exome sequencing in children: a survey of parental understanding, experience and psychological impact. Clin Genet. 2018;93:1039–48. · DOI
- Rosell AM, Pena LD, Schoch K, Spillmann R, Sullivan J, Hooper SR, et al. Not the end of the odyssey: parental perceptions of whole exome sequencing (WES) in pediatric undiagnosed disorders. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:1019–31. · DOI
- Donohue KE, Dolan SM, Watnick D, Gallagher KM, Odgis JA, Suckiel SA, et al. Hope versus reality: parent expectations of genomic testing. Patient Educ Couns. 2021;104:2073–9. · DOI
- Frey B. The SAGE encyclopedia of educational research, measurement, and evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2018. · DOI · Paper page
- Yardley L, Bishop F. Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: a pragmatic approach. 2nd ed. London, UK: Sage; 2017. · DOI
- Cella D, Hughes C, Peterman A, Chang CH, Peshkin BN, Schwartz MD, et al. A brief assessment of concerns associated with genetic testing for cancer: the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. Health Psychol. 2002;21:564–72. · DOI
- Becerra-Perez MM, Menear M, Turcotte S, Labrecque M, Légaré F. More primary care patients regret health decisions if they experienced decisional conflict in the consultation: a secondary analysis of a multicenter descriptive study. BMC Fam Pract. 2016;17:156. · DOI
- Roberts K, Dowell A, Nie J-B. Attempting rigour and replicability in thematic analysis of qualitative research data; a case study of codebook development. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19:66. · DOI
- Aldridge CE, Osiovich H, Hal Siden H, Elliott AM. Rapid genome-wide sequencing in a neonatal intensive care unit: a retrospective qualitative exploration of parental experiences. J Genet Couns. 2021;30:616–29. · DOI
- Mollison L, O’Daniel JM, Henderson GE, Berg JS, Skinner D. Parents’ perceptions of personal utility of exome sequencing results. Genet Med. 2020;22:752–7. · DOI
- Esquivel-Sada D, Nguyen MT. Diagnosis of rare diseases under focus: impacts for Canadian patients. J Community Genet. 2018;9:37–50. · DOI
- Yuen J, Lee SY, Courtney E, Lim J, Soh H, Li ST, et al. Evaluating empowerment in genetic counseling using patient-reported outcomes. Clin Genet. 2020;97:246–56. · DOI
- De Santis M, Hervas C, Weinman A, Bosi G, Bottarelli V. Patient empowerment of people living with rare diseases. Its contribution to sustainable and resilient healthcare systems. Ann Ist Super Sanita. 2019;55:283–91.
- Bradbury AR, Patrick-Miller L, Egleston BL, Maxwell KN, DiGiovanni L, Brower J, et al. Returning individual genetic research results to research participants: uptake and outcomes among patients with breast cancer. JCO Precis Oncol. 2018;2:PO.17.00250. · DOI
- Wynn J, Lewis K, Amendola LM, Bernhardt BA, Biswas S, Joshi M, et al. Clinical providers’ experiences with returning results from genomic sequencing: an interview study. BMC Med Genomics. 2018;11:45. · DOI
- Lim Q, McGill BC, Quinn VF, Tucker KM, Mizrahi D, Patenaude AF, et al. Parents’ attitudes toward genetic testing of children for health conditions: a systematic review. Clin Genet. 2017;92:569–78. · DOI
- Tremblay I, Grondin S, Laberge AM, Cousineau D, Carmant L, Rowan A, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic misconception: parental expectations and perspectives regarding genetic testing for developmental disorders. J Autism Dev Disord. 2019;49:363–75. · DOI
- Kolemen AB, Akyuz E, Toprak A, Deveci E, Yesil G. Evaluation of the parents’ anxiety levels before and after the diagnosis of their child with a rare genetic disease: the necessity of psychological support. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2021;16:402. · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Gurasashvili, J., Silverio, S. A., Hill, M., Peter, M., Stafford‐Smith, B., & Lewis, C. (2024) · Journal of Genetic Counseling · doi:10.1002/jgc4.1818 · Cited by 13
“Peter et al. identified that many parents who chose to have GS had pinned their hopes on finding a genetic cause for their child's condition (Peter et al., 2022 ).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationHoffmann, T. M., Friedrich, B., & Lewis, C. (2025) · Journal of Genetic Counseling · doi:10.1002/jgc4.70149 · Cited by 3
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Peter, M., Hammond, J., Sanderson, S. C., Gurasashvili, J., Hunter, A., Searle, B., Patch, C., Chitty, L. S., Hill, M., & Lewis, C.
- Affiliations
- Great Ormond Street Hospital (GB)
- Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
- Genetic Alliance UK (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Queen Mary University of London (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Peter, Michelle
- ORCID
- Venue
- European Journal of Human Genetics
- Published
- 2022-03-09
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 604-610
- ISSN
- 1018-4813 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-5438
- PMC
- PMC9091267
- OpenAlex
- W4221071899
- Cited by
- 37
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 1
- FWCI
- 4.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- DH | NIHR | Research for Patient Benefit Programme (PB-PG-1014-35016)
- NIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) Biomedical Research Centre
- DH | NIHR | Public Health Research Programme (PB-PG-1014-35016)
- NIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) NIHR Advanced Fellowship Grant
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
- Keywords
- genome sequencing, rare diseases, 100,000 Genomes Project, decision regret, psychological impact, genetic diagnosis, variants of uncertain significance, post-test counseling, expectation setting, emotional distress, uncertainty, genetic risk prediction
- MeSH terms
- Base Sequence, Emotions, Humans, Parents, Uncertainty, Rare Diseases
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