Rebecca Purvis , Laura E. Forrest , Mary-Anne Young , Sharne Limb , Paul James , Natalie Taylor
{"title":"Defining next steps in the clinical implementation of polygenic scores: A landscape analysis of professional groups’ perspectives","authors":"Rebecca Purvis , Laura E. Forrest , Mary-Anne Young , Sharne Limb , Paul James , Natalie Taylor","doi":"10.1016/j.gim.2025.101414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Professional perspectives on polygenic scores (PGS) have surged in-line with significant research investment. It is unclear whether these perspectives are leading the health care sector toward a comprehensive implementation approach. This scoping review addresses this knowledge gap, analyzing available publications for concurring and discordant perspectives.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Methodology followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework. Six databases were systematically searched alongside screening of professional websites. Descriptive and deductive content analyses were completed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 28 perspectives were analyzed. Implementation was supportable if evidentiary thresholds for clinical utility could be met, with exceptions being in vitro fertilization and prenatal settings. Evidence base and relative advantage of PGS were the strongest determinants of implementation success, with resourcing also being emphasized. Key strategies included ongoing research, developing education materials, and facilitating relay of information. Attention was not paid to leadership nor to stakeholder interrelationships. There was no recommended framework to facilitate the clinical implementation of PGS.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The steps toward executing implementation remain vague. Commonalities in perspectives suggest value in a transferable approach. If PGS are to be successful, policy makers and leaders must consider effective resource allocation by addressing priority barriers and utilizing implementation methodologies. Continuing efforts to establish PGS clinical utility and value, guidelines and policies, and educational materials are needed.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":12717,"journal":{"name":"Genetics in Medicine","volume":"27 6","pages":"Article 101414"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098360025000619","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Professional perspectives on polygenic scores (PGS) have surged in-line with significant research investment. It is unclear whether these perspectives are leading the health care sector toward a comprehensive implementation approach. This scoping review addresses this knowledge gap, analyzing available publications for concurring and discordant perspectives.
Methods
Methodology followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework. Six databases were systematically searched alongside screening of professional websites. Descriptive and deductive content analyses were completed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation.
Results
A total of 28 perspectives were analyzed. Implementation was supportable if evidentiary thresholds for clinical utility could be met, with exceptions being in vitro fertilization and prenatal settings. Evidence base and relative advantage of PGS were the strongest determinants of implementation success, with resourcing also being emphasized. Key strategies included ongoing research, developing education materials, and facilitating relay of information. Attention was not paid to leadership nor to stakeholder interrelationships. There was no recommended framework to facilitate the clinical implementation of PGS.
Conclusion
The steps toward executing implementation remain vague. Commonalities in perspectives suggest value in a transferable approach. If PGS are to be successful, policy makers and leaders must consider effective resource allocation by addressing priority barriers and utilizing implementation methodologies. Continuing efforts to establish PGS clinical utility and value, guidelines and policies, and educational materials are needed.
期刊介绍:
Genetics in Medicine (GIM) is the official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. The journal''s mission is to enhance the knowledge, understanding, and practice of medical genetics and genomics through publications in clinical and laboratory genetics and genomics, including ethical, legal, and social issues as well as public health.
GIM encourages research that combats racism, includes diverse populations and is written by authors from diverse and underrepresented backgrounds.