These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18941419)

  • 1. Changing interpretations, stable genes: responsibilities of patients, professionals, and policy makers in the clinical interpretation of complex genetic information.
    Shirts BH; Parker LS
    Genet Med; 2008 Nov; 10(11):778-83. PubMed ID: 18941419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF; Ovelman C; McGuire W
    Early Hum Dev; 2020 Nov; 150():105191. PubMed ID: 33036834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology
    J Clin Oncol; 2003 Jun; 21(12):2397-406. PubMed ID: 12692171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The changing landscape of genetic testing and its impact on clinical and laboratory services and research in Europe.
    Hastings R; de Wert G; Fowler B; Krawczak M; Vermeulen E; Bakker E; Borry P; Dondorp W; Nijsingh N; Barton D; Schmidtke J; van El CG; Vermeesch J; Stol Y; Carmen Howard H; Cornel MC
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2012 Sep; 20(9):911-6. PubMed ID: 22453292
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The regulation of direct-to-consumer genetic tests.
    Kaye J
    Hum Mol Genet; 2008 Oct; 17(R2):R180-3. PubMed ID: 18852208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Challenges of variant reinterpretation: Opinions of stakeholders and need for guidelines.
    Berger SM; Appelbaum PS; Siegel K; Wynn J; Saami AM; Brokamp E; O'Connor BC; Hamid R; Martin DM; Chung WK
    Genet Med; 2022 Sep; 24(9):1878-1887. PubMed ID: 35767006
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility, Adopted on February 20, 1996.
    J Clin Oncol; 1996 May; 14(5):1730-6; discussion 1737-40. PubMed ID: 8622094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Evaluation of genetic tests for susceptibility to common complex diseases: why, when and how?
    Wright CF; Kroese M
    Hum Genet; 2010 Feb; 127(2):125-34. PubMed ID: 19936793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Physician awareness, preparedness, and opinions toward consumer-initiated genetic testing in Thailand: Views from a changing landscape.
    Kittikoon S; Pithukpakorn M; Pramyothin P
    J Genet Couns; 2021 Dec; 30(6):1535-1543. PubMed ID: 33931918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. [Attitudes towards predictive genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease].
    Illes F; Bernhardt T; Prell K; Rietz C; Rudinger G; Frölich L; Maier W; Rietschel M
    Z Gerontol Geriatr; 2006 Jun; 39(3):233-9. PubMed ID: 16794889
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Differences in attitudes toward genetic testing among the public, patients, and health-care professionals in Korea.
    Eum H; Lee M; Yoon J; Cho J; Lee ES; Choi KS; Lee S; Jung SY; Lim MC; Kong SY; Chang YJ
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2018 Oct; 26(10):1432-1440. PubMed ID: 29915183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Reinterpretation, reclassification, and its downstream effects: challenges for clinical laboratory geneticists.
    El Mecky J; Johansson L; Plantinga M; Fenwick A; Lucassen A; Dijkhuizen T; van der Hout A; Lyle K; van Langen I
    BMC Med Genomics; 2019 Nov; 12(1):170. PubMed ID: 31779608
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Doctors in society. Medical professionalism in a changing world.
    Working Party of the Royal College of Physicians
    Clin Med (Lond); 2005; 5(6 Suppl 1):S5-40. PubMed ID: 16408403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: good, bad or benign?
    Caulfield T; Ries NM; Ray PN; Shuman C; Wilson B
    Clin Genet; 2010 Feb; 77(2):101-5. PubMed ID: 19968666
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Social and ethical implications of BRCA testing.
    Surbone A
    Ann Oncol; 2011 Jan; 22 Suppl 1():i60-6. PubMed ID: 21285154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Are providers prepared for genomic medicine: interpretation of Direct-to-Consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) results and genetic self-efficacy by medical professionals.
    McGrath SP; Walton N; Williams MS; Kim KK; Bastola K
    BMC Health Serv Res; 2019 Nov; 19(1):844. PubMed ID: 31760949
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Understanding variations in secondary findings reporting practices across U.S. genome sequencing laboratories.
    Ackerman SL; Koenig BA
    AJOB Empir Bioeth; 2018; 9(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 29131714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: to test or not to test, that is the question.
    Dandara C; Greenberg J; Lambie L; Lombard Z; Naicker T; Ramesar R; Ramsay M; Roberts L; Theron M; Venter P; Bardien-Kruger S
    S Afr Med J; 2013 Jul; 103(8):510-2. PubMed ID: 23885726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Ethical, social and legal implications of genetic testing in liver disease.
    van Leeuwen DJ; Bernat JL
    Hepatology; 2006 Jun; 43(6):1195-201. PubMed ID: 16729331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Direct to consumer testing in reproductive contexts--should health professionals be concerned?
    Skirton H
    Life Sci Soc Policy; 2015; 11():4. PubMed ID: 26085310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.