Perceptions of Personalized Medicine in an Academic Health System: Educational Findings
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: Prior reports demonstrate that personalized medicine implementation in clinical care is lacking. Given the program focus at Duke University on personalized medicine, we assessed health care providers' perspectives on their preparation and educational needs to effectively integrate personalized medicine tools and applications into their clinical practices. METHODS: Data from 78 health care providers who participated in a larger study of personalized and precision medicine at Duke University were analyzed using Qualtrics (descriptive statistics). Individuals age 18 years and older were recruited for the larger study through broad email contacts across the university and health system. All participants completed an online 35-question survey that was developed, pilot-tested, and administered by a team of interdisciplinary researchers and clinicians at the Center for Applied Genomics and Precision Medicine. RESULTS: Overall, providers reported being ill-equipped to implement personalized medicine in clinical practice. Many respondents identified educational resources as critical for strengthening personalized medicine implementation in both research and clinical practice. Responses did not differ significantly between specialists and primary providers or by years since completion of the medical degree. CONCLUSIONS: Survey findings support prior calls for provider and patient education in personalized medicine. Respondents identified focus areas in training, education, and research for improving personalized medicine uptake. Given respondents' emphasis on educational needs, now may be an ideal time to address these needs in clinical training and public education programs.
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
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?
Professionals describe a lack in their own knowledge or a limited understanding of precision medicine.
“Professionals also describe a lack in their own knowledge or a limited understanding, as quantitative studies demonstrate [36, 37, 44, 81, 82, 92, 103, 104].”
From Patients’ and professionals’ views related to ethical issues in precision medicine: a mixed research synthesis (2021) · cites this paper as [104]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- [1]McCarthy JJ McLeod HL Ginsburg GS Genomic medicine: a decade of successes, challenges, and opportunities Sci Transl Med 2013 5 189 189sr4 23761042
- [2]Wade JE Ledbetter DH Williams MS Implementation of genomic medicine in a health care delivery system: a value proposition? Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2014 166C 1 112 6 24619641
- [3]Cohen MJ Overcoming barriers in the implementation of personalized medicine into clinical practice Isr Med Assoc J 2013 15 10 599 601 24266084
- [4]Manolio TA Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here Genet Med 2013 15 4 258 67 23306799 PMC3835144
- [5]Williams MS Genomic medicine implementation: learning by example Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet 2014 166C 1 8 14 24616394
- [6]Buchanan AH Use of a Patient-Entered Family Health History Tool with Decision Support in Primary Care: Impact of Identification of Increased Risk Patients on Genetic Counseling Attendance J Genet Couns 2014 25120038
- [7]Haga SB Primary care physicians' knowledge of and experience with pharmacogenetic testing Clin Genet 2012 82 4 388 94 22698141 PMC3440554
- [8]Childs B Wiener C Valle D A science of the individual: implications for a medical school curriculum Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2005 6 313 30 16124864
- [9]Kung JT Gelbart ME Getting a head start: the importance of personal genetics education in high schools Yale J Biol Med 2012 85 1 87 92 22461746 PMC3313542
- [10]Redfield RJ "Why do we have to learn this stuff?"--a new genetics for 21st century students PLoS Biol 2012 10 7 e1001356 22802724 PMC3389015
- [11]Parkinson DR Ziegler J Educating for personalized medicine: a perspective from oncology Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009 86 1 23 5 19536120
- [13]Katsanis S Perspectives on Genetic and Genomic Technologies in an Academic Medical Center: The Duke Experience in review PMC4493486 25854543
- [14]Hoffman MA Williams MS Electronic medical records and personalized medicine Hum Genet 2011 130 1 33 9 21519832
- [15]Gottesman O The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network: past, present, and future Genet Med 2013 15 10 761 71 23743551 PMC3795928
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Erdmann, A., Rehmann-Sutter, C., & Bozzaro, C. (2021) · BMC Medical Ethics · doi:10.1186/s12910-021-00682-8 · Cited by 86 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vorderstrasse, A., Katsanis, S., Minear, M., Yang, N., RakhraBurris, T., Reeves, J., CookDeegan, R., Ginsburg, G., & Simmons, L.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Duke University Health System (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Contemporary Medical Education
- Publisher
- ScopeMed
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 14
- ISSN
- 2146-8354 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4520318
- OpenAlex
- W2123785239
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
- FWCI
- 1.79
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Contemporary Medical Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5p50hg003391-09)
- National Human Genome Research Institute (P50-HG003391)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Health Informatics › Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
- Keywords
- personalized medicine, precision medicine, healthcare provider perceptions, educational needs, clinical implementation, academic health system, provider training, patient education, Duke University
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
