Knowledge and Attitudes of Pharmacogenetics Among Canadian Nurses: Implications for Nursing Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pharmacogenetic testing is used to tailor medication recommendations based on an individual's genetic makeup. Increased precision in prescribing medication through the use of genetics leads to a reduction in adverse drug reactions resulting in decreased morbidity and mortality. Due to the noted benefits to patient health outcomes and reduction in healthcare costs, a growing number of Canadian health centers and community pharmacies are beginning to offer pharmacogenetic testing. Previous studies indicate that Canadian nurses have minimal education in genomics; however, there has been an increase in attention to nursing roles in the implementation of genomic health practices in recent years. As the use of pharmacogenetics increases, nurses will be expected to be knowledgeable about pharmacogenetic testing and will play a key role in patient education. Results of previous studies show a low level of knowledge about pharmacogenetic testing among physicians and pharmacists; however, this area of knowledge has not been systematically assessed for nurses. To address this gap, a cross-sectional study was conducted to assess knowledge and attitudes about pharmacogenetics of nurses across Canada. An anonymous online survey was completed by 236 participants, including nursing students (n = 84), registered nurses (n = 144), and nurse practitioners/nurse clinicians (n = 9). Participants represented 9/10 provinces and 2/3 territories across Canada. The majority of the participants (65.9%) lacked formal education in genetics and indicated a fair or poor level of understanding of pharmacogenetic testing in the clinical setting (93%). The mean score for pharmacogenetic knowledge questions was 34.5%, while the mean score for genetics knowledge questions was 61.1%. Despite their self-reported lack of knowledge and understanding, most participants had positive attitudes towards pharmacogenetic testing and recognized its ability to decrease adverse drug reactions and improve clinical efficacy (81.3%). Most participants (73.7%) were interested in educational offerings related to pharmacogenetic testing, particularly web-based courses and seminars/lectures. The results of this study indicate that nurses across Canada may not have the necessary knowledge to support the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing into clinical practice. However, positive attitudes and interest in learning about pharmacogenetics indicate opportunities for the development of educational activities to ensure that Canadian nurses are prepared for upcoming changes that will impact nursing practice. Résumé Les tests pharmacogénétiques sont utilisés pour adapter les recommandations de médicaments en fonction de la constitution génétique d’un individu. Une précision accrue dans la prescription de médicaments grâce à l’utilisation de la génétique conduit à une réduction
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".