Cited by 26Race, Genetics, and SocietyPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education

Personalized Medicine, Availability, and Group Disparity: An Inquiry into How Physicians Perceive and Rate the Elements and Barriers of Personalized Medicine

Petersen, Katelin E., Prows, Cynthia A., Martin, Lisa J., Maglo, Koffi N.·2014·Public Health Genomics

Abstract

Background: The success of personalized medicine depends on factors influencing the availability and implementation of its new tools to individualize clinical care. However, little is known about physicians' views of the availability of personalized medicine across racial/ethnic groups and the relationship between perceived availability and clinical implementation. This study examines physicians' perceptions of key elements/tools and potential barriers to personalized medicine in connection with their perceptions of the availability of the latter across subpopulations. Methods: Study subjects consisted of physicians recruited from Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center and UC Health. An electronic survey conducted from September 2012 to November 2012 recruited 104 physicians. Wilcoxon rank sum analysis compared groups. Results: Physicians were divided about whether personalized medicine contributes to health equality, as 37.4% of them believe that personalized medicine is currently available only for some subpopulations. They also rated the importance of racial/ethnic background almost as high as the importance of genetic information in the delivery of personalized medicine. Actual elements of personalized medicine rated highest include family history, drug-drug interaction alerts in medical records, and biomarker measurements to guide therapy. Costs of gene-based therapies and genetic testing were rated the most significant barriers. The ratings of several elements and barriers were associated with perceived availability of personalized medicine across subpopulations. Conclusion: While physicians hold differing views about the availability and implementation of personalized medicine, they likewise establish complex relationships between race/ethnicity and personalized medicine that may carry serious implications for its clinical success.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000362359

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Petersen, K. E., Prows, C. A., Martin, L. J., & Maglo, K. N.
Affiliations
University of Cincinnati (US)
Venue
Public Health Genomics
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Published
2014
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
209-220
ISSN
  • 1422-2795 (ISSN-L)
  • 1662-4246
  • 1662-8063
OpenAlex
W2032451354
Cited by
26
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Public Health Genomics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000077)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Race, Genetics, and Society
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Keywords
personalized medicine, physician perceptions, racial and ethnic disparities, health equity, implementation barriers, cost of genetic testing, gene therapy, genetic information, family history (medicine), drug-drug interaction alerts, biomarkers, children's hospitals
MeSH terms
Adult, Ethnicity, Female, Genetic Testing, Health Services Accessibility, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Physicians, Surveys and Questionnaires, Referral and Consultation, United States, Healthcare Disparities, Precision Medicine

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