Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Does the type of disease matter when receiving secondary findings? A qualitative vignette study on Finnish adults' views

Conference paper

Vornanen M. et al, (2019), EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 27, 716 - 716

Mainstreaming BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing: an interview study of healthcare professionals' views

Conference paper

Wright S. et al, (2019), EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 27, 664 - 665

Moving into the mainstream: Treatment focussed genetic testing a screening tool or diagnostic resource?

Conference paper

Hallowell N. et al, (2019), EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 27, 704 - 704

Lay Perspectives on Receiving Different Types of Genomic Secondary Findings: a Qualitative Vignette Study.

Journal article

Vornanen M. et al, (2019), J Genet Couns, 28, 343 - 354

Enabling Global Clinical Collaborations on Identifiable Patient Data: The Minerva Initiative.

Journal article

Nellåker C. et al, (2019), Front Genet, 10

How should decision aids be used during counseling to help patients who are "genetically at risk"?

Journal article

Evans N. et al, (2019), AMA Journal of Ethics, 21, 865 - 872

'I would like to discuss it further with an expert': a focus group study of Finnish adults' perspectives on genetic incidental findings

Conference paper

Vornanen M. et al, (2018), EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 26, 816 - 816

Big data phenotyping in rare diseases: some ethical issues.

Journal article

Hallowell N. et al, (2018), Genet Med

Research or clinical care: what's the difference?

Journal article

Hallowell N., (2018), J Med Ethics, 44, 359 - 360

Load More