Federal grant · project grant (b)
Deploying a Genomic-medicine Risk Assessment Model for Diverse Primary Care Populations and Settings - Abstract Family Health History (FHH), a Critical Component of Genomic Medicine That Is Essential for Both Identifying Individuals at Risk for Hereditary Conditions and for Contextualizing Results of Genetic Testing, Continues to Be Broadly Underutilized and Underappreciated in Clinical Care. Barriers to Adequate Data Collection and Synthesis Are Numerous and Cross All Clinical Stakeholders: Patients, Providers, and Health Systems. Significantly, They Include the Pervasive View That FHH Is Unimportant Except in Select Cases and That It Rarely Contributes to Clinical Decision Making. With This Perspective, Few Providers Have Been Willing to Allocate Precious Time to Collect Detailed FHHS or to Learn the Complex Algorithms Required to Synthesize FHH Data Into Actionable Care Plans. However, in Studies of Systematic Fhh-based Risk Assessments in Unselected Populations, 25% of Patients Meet Risk Criteria for (actionable) Hereditary Conditions. Fhh-based Risk Assessment Programs Have Emerged to Address These Barriers, But as Designed Do Not Meet the Needs of Low Literacy, Low Resource Populations. the Goal of This Proposal Is to Develop a Scalable End-to-end Solution for Risk Assessment and Management That Meets the Needs of Low Resource Settings. Our Central Hypothesis Is That Combining FHH- Driven Risk Assessment, a Literacy-enhanced Interface, Family Engagement (through Social Networking Platforms for Data Gather and Risk Sharing), and a Genetic Testing Delivery System, Will Create a Solution That Engages and Increases the Proportion of Diverse Patients Who Are Identified as at Increased Risk, Who Undergo Testing, and, When Appropriate, Who Initiate Cascade Screening Among Relatives. in This Proposal We Will Define and Deploy This New Care Delivery Model as the “genomic Medicine Risk Assessment Care for Everyone” (grace). to This End We Will 1) Develop and Deploy the Model Using Pre-implementation Assessments at Clinical Sites With Highly Diverse Patient Populations to Select the Most Appropriate Integration Options and Pathways for Both Patients and Providers; and 2) Perform a Randomized Implementation-effectiveness Pragmatic Hybrid Trial to Assess Implementation and Effectiveness Outcomes Relevant to These Diverse Populations. Outcomes Will Include Reach, Uptake, Clinical Utility, Accessibility, Genetic Testing Frequency, Genetic Testing Results, and Cost- Effectiveness.
Committed
$3.7 Million
Paid out
$3.5M
94%
Committed, not yet paid
$230.7K
6%
Loading…
Everything here is this single award's whole record — signed, amended, paid — not a fiscal-year slice. The by-year charts elsewhere split an award across the years it was committed; this page keeps it whole.
Committed is what the government has legally promised on this award so far. Contracts can also carry a ceiling — the maximum if every option is exercised. Unspent ceiling is headroom, not money owed.
The cash actually disbursed against this award. The gap from committed is the disbursement pipeline: promised, not yet cashed.
Each transaction is a signing event — an action that created or changed the award, dated the day it was signed — not a payment. Negative amounts are real: money de-committed at closeout or renegotiation.
One bar, the award’s whole arithmetic: paid out, then committed, not yet paid, then unspent ceiling.