Connection

AMY MCGUIRE to Male

This is a "connection" page, showing publications AMY MCGUIRE has written about Male.
Connection Strength

0.553
  1. FIGG at 5: An update on U.S. public perspectives on forensic investigative genetic genealogy five years after its introduction to criminal investigations. Forensic Sci Int. 2025 Feb; 367:112372.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  2. A Right to Privacy and Confidentiality: Ethical Medical Care for Patients in United States Immigration Detention. J Law Med Ethics. 2020 03; 48(1):161-168.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.029
  3. Responsibility, culpability, and parental views on genomic testing for seriously ill children. Genet Med. 2019 12; 21(12):2791-2797.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  4. Hopeful and Concerned: Public Input on Building a Trustworthy Medical Information Commons. J Law Med Ethics. 2019 03; 47(1):70-87.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.027
  5. Should police have access to genetic genealogy databases? Capturing the Golden State Killer and other criminals using a controversial new forensic technique. PLoS Biol. 2018 10; 16(10):e2006906.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.026
  6. HEADS4: Social Media Screening in Adolescent Primary Care. Pediatrics. 2018 06; 141(6).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.025
  7. When bins blur: Patient perspectives on categories of results from clinical whole genome sequencing. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Apr-Jun; 8(2):82-88.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.023
  8. Participants' recall and understanding of genomic research and large-scale data sharing. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2013 Oct; 8(4):42-52.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.018
  9. Currents in contemporary bioethics. Identifying consanguinity through routine genomic analysis: reporting requirements. J Law Med Ethics. 2012; 40(4):1040-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  10. Balancing the risks and benefits of genomic data sharing: genome research participants' perspectives. Public Health Genomics. 2012; 15(2):106-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  11. To share or not to share: a randomized trial of consent for data sharing in genome research. Genet Med. 2011 Nov; 13(11):948-55.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.016
  12. Social networkers' attitudes toward direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Am J Bioeth. 2009; 9(6-7):3-10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.013
  13. Missed expectations? Physicians' views of patients' participation in medical decision-making. Med Care. 2005 May; 43(5):466-70.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  14. Anaplastic meningioma in a 6-year-old with somatic YAP1::MAML2 fusion and multiple endocrine neoplasia type 4 (MEN4) syndrome. Cancer Genet. 2025 Apr; 292-293:106-110.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  15. Family genetic risk communication and reverse cascade testing in the BabySeq project. Genet Med. 2025 Mar; 27(3):101350.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  16. The BabySeq Project: A clinical trial of genome sequencing in a diverse cohort of infants. Am J Hum Genet. 2024 Oct 03; 111(10):2094-2106.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  17. Comparing the Diagnostic Yield of Germline Exome Versus Panel Sequencing in the Diverse Population of the Texas KidsCanSeq Pediatric Cancer Study. JCO Precis Oncol. 2024 Sep; 8:e2400187.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  18. Measuring perceived utility of genomic sequencing: Development and validation of the GENEtic Utility (GENE-U) scale for adult screening. Genet Med. 2024 Nov; 26(11):101240.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  19. "The truth should not be hidden": Experiences and recommendations of individuals making NPE discoveries through genetic genealogy databases. Genet Med. 2024 Oct; 26(10):101210.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  20. Genomic sequencing research in pediatric cancer care: Decision making, attitudes, and perceived utility among adolescents and young adults and their parents. Genet Med. 2024 Aug; 26(8):101168.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  21. Measuring perceived utility of genomic sequencing: Development and validation of?the GENEtic Utility (GENE-U) scale for pediatric diagnostic testing. Genet Med. 2024 Aug; 26(8):101146.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  22. Public Perspectives on Investigative Genetic Genealogy: Findings from a National Focus Group Study. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2024 Oct-Dec; 15(4):280-290.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  23. Genetic Researchers' Use of and Interest in Research With Diverse Ancestral Groups. JAMA Netw Open. 2024 04 01; 7(4):e246805.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.010
  24. Families' experiences accessing care after genomic sequencing in the pediatric cancer context: "It's just been a big juggle". J Genet Couns. 2024 Dec; 33(6):1337-1350.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.009
  25. Psychosocial Effect of Newborn Genomic Sequencing on Families in the BabySeq Project: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2021 11 01; 175(11):1132-1141.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.008
  26. Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies. Genet Med. 2019 12; 21(12):2781-2790.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  27. Predispositional genome sequencing in healthy adults: design, participant characteristics, and early outcomes of the PeopleSeq Consortium. Genome Med. 2019 02 27; 11(1):10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  28. Interpretation of Genomic Sequencing Results in Healthy and Ill Newborns: Results from the BabySeq Project. Am J Hum Genet. 2019 01 03; 104(1):76-93.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  29. Perceived Benefits, Risks, and Utility of Newborn Genomic Sequencing in the BabySeq Project. Pediatrics. 2019 01; 143(Suppl 1):S6-S13.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  30. Returning a Genomic Result for an Adult-Onset Condition to the Parents of a Newborn: Insights From the BabySeq Project. Pediatrics. 2019 01; 143(Suppl 1):S37-S43.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  31. Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and health-care costs from a multisite study. Genet Med. 2019 05; 21(5):1100-1110.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.007
  32. Parental interest in genomic sequencing of newborns: enrollment experience from the BabySeq Project. Genet Med. 2019 03; 21(3):622-630.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  33. The phenotypic spectrum of Xia-Gibbs syndrome. Am J Med Genet A. 2018 06; 176(6):1315-1326.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  34. Short-term costs of integrating whole-genome sequencing into primary care and cardiology settings: a pilot randomized trial. Genet Med. 2018 12; 20(12):1544-1553.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  35. How Primary Care Providers Talk to Patients about Genome Sequencing Results: Risk, Rationale, and Recommendation. J Gen Intern Med. 2018 06; 33(6):877-885.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  36. Patient understanding of, satisfaction with, and perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing: findings from the MedSeq Project. Genet Med. 2018 09; 20(9):1069-1076.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  37. Portero versus portador: Spanish interpretation of genomic terminology during whole exome sequencing results disclosure. Per Med. 2017 11; 14(6):503-514.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  38. Do privacy and security regulations need a status update? Perspectives from an intergenerational survey. PLoS One. 2017; 12(9):e0184525.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  39. The Impact of Whole-Genome Sequencing on the Primary Care and Outcomes of Healthy Adult Patients: A Pilot Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017 08 01; 167(3):159-169.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  40. Consumer Perspectives on Access to Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Role of Demographic Factors and the Testing Experience. Milbank Q. 2017 06; 95(2):291-318.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  41. A curated gene list for reporting results of newborn genomic sequencing. Genet Med. 2017 07; 19(7):809-818.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.006
  42. Participants and Study Decliners' Perspectives About the Risks of Participating in a Clinical Trial of Whole Genome Sequencing. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2016 02; 11(1):21-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  43. Are physicians prepared for whole genome sequencing? a qualitative analysis. Clin Genet. 2016 Feb; 89(2):228-34.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  44. Why information alone is not enough: behavioral economics and the future of genomic medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2014 Oct 21; 161(8):605-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  45. The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine. Trials. 2014 Mar 20; 15:85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  46. Pediatric data sharing in genomic research: attitudes and preferences of parents. Pediatrics. 2014 Apr; 133(4):690-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  47. Personalized genomic disease risk of volunteers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Oct 15; 110(42):16957-62.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.005
  48. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science. 2013 Jan 18; 339(6117):321-4.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  49. Incidental copy-number variants identified by routine genome testing in a clinical population. Genet Med. 2013 Jan; 15(1):45-54.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  50. Informed consent in research to improve the number and quality of deceased donor organs. Crit Care Med. 2011 Feb; 39(2):280-3.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  51. Whole-genome sequencing in a patient with Charcot-Marie-Tooth neuropathy. N Engl J Med. 2010 Apr 01; 362(13):1181-91.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.004
  52. The complete genome of an individual by massively parallel DNA sequencing. Nature. 2008 Apr 17; 452(7189):872-6.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.003
Connection Strength

The connection strength for concepts is the sum of the scores for each matching publication.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.