Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests?
Greater clarity on the nature of clinical utility is desirable. Of itself it may not bring about greater use of tests, including WGS (whole-genome sequencing), not least because clinical utility studies when performed may not confirm predicted changes in patient outcome. The notion that single “pivo...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Publishing Group
2021-03-01
|
| Series: | npj Genomic Medicine |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-021-00187-8 |
| id |
doaj-c587ebd40d084605972d3dbf4b4dc870 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
Article |
| spelling |
doaj-c587ebd40d084605972d3dbf4b4dc8702021-03-11T12:46:31ZengNature Publishing Groupnpj Genomic Medicine2056-79442021-03-01611210.1038/s41525-021-00187-8Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests?Chris Hyde0Exeter Test Group, Institute of Health Research, College of Medicine and Health, University of ExeterGreater clarity on the nature of clinical utility is desirable. Of itself it may not bring about greater use of tests, including WGS (whole-genome sequencing), not least because clinical utility studies when performed may not confirm predicted changes in patient outcome. The notion that single “pivotal” clinical utility studies will achieve uptake needs to be questioned and that the evidence base for tests is likely to rely on patchworks of imperfect evidence embraced.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-021-00187-8 |
| collection |
DOAJ |
| language |
English |
| format |
Article |
| sources |
DOAJ |
| author |
Chris Hyde |
| spellingShingle |
Chris Hyde Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? npj Genomic Medicine |
| author_facet |
Chris Hyde |
| author_sort |
Chris Hyde |
| title |
Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| title_short |
Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| title_full |
Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| title_fullStr |
Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| title_sort |
will better evidence on clinical utility bring about greater use of (genetic) tests? |
| publisher |
Nature Publishing Group |
| series |
npj Genomic Medicine |
| issn |
2056-7944 |
| publishDate |
2021-03-01 |
| description |
Greater clarity on the nature of clinical utility is desirable. Of itself it may not bring about greater use of tests, including WGS (whole-genome sequencing), not least because clinical utility studies when performed may not confirm predicted changes in patient outcome. The notion that single “pivotal” clinical utility studies will achieve uptake needs to be questioned and that the evidence base for tests is likely to rely on patchworks of imperfect evidence embraced. |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-021-00187-8 |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT chrishyde willbetterevidenceonclinicalutilitybringaboutgreateruseofgenetictests |
| _version_ |
1724224077599604736 |