Viewpoint: Doctors need better training if DNA sequencing becomes standard care

blog think small
[Recently] the CEO of Pennsylvania health care provider Geisinger announced that its doctors will now offer patients DNA sequencing “as part of routine preventative care.” Right now, most doctors offer genetic screening only when they suspect something is wrong, but the move suggests that soon, DNA tests could become a normal part of our checkups.

There is a truly overwhelming number of genetic tests that doctors can order: 75,000 on the market, and 10 new ones entering the market every day, according to a recent study.

Meanwhile, a study of primary care providers in New York showed that only 14 percent of them were comfortable interpreting these results.

As major health care providers adopt routine genetic screening, they need to train their doctors to understand which tests to pick, how they work, and how to interpret the results. Otherwise, overwhelmed doctors may order the wrong test, or they may misinterpret the result — confusing patients and potentially leading to wrong diagnoses or false positives.

There’s a second part of training, too. It’s not enough that doctors understand the benefits of the different tests and feel confident sharing the information. They need to be trained to make sure patients understand the pros and cons of getting their DNA sequenced.

Read full, original post: If doctors are going to do DNA tests at routine checkups, they need more training

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.noReviewsLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot 2025-09-17 at 12.41
Misinformation alert: No, glyphosate use in Canadian forests is not spurring more wildfires
Screenshot 2026-07-11 094410
Growing animal muscle and fat cells inside rice grains and calling it beef: One of numerous genetically engineered products shaking up our ecosystem
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-9-2026-02_39_22-PM
Viewpoint: Polyphenols or NAD+ supplements to combat aging: No, Gwenyth Paltrow and followers, don’t waste your money.
file-f-d-d-
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Europe's AC debacle underscores fatal flaw in green activism
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-8-2026-12_32_48-PM
Viewpoint: SCOTUS strikes a blow against junk science in Bayer glyphosate case. Will it deter mass tort litigators?
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-7-2026-01_57_55-PM
Viewpoint: Europe’s rejection of air conditioning is the poster child for misunderstanding how to mitigate the impact of climate change
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
afb-a-b
As the EU loosens restrictions on agricultural gene editing, it remains years behind the rest of the world on equally-safe GMO foods
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-1-2026-03_33_49-PM
‘Alternative’ cancer treatments that could kill you
Screenshot 2026-07-16 at 8.49
Pete Hegseth’s bizarre Viagra commercial as Trump administration endorses ‘hormone replacement therapy’

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.