Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies have a long history, with increasing presence and potential in society and medicine. Much of the medical literature is highly optimistic about AI and machine learning, but fears also exist that healthcare professionals will be replaced by machines. AI remains mysterious for many practitioners, so this paper aims to unwind both hype and fear related to the technology for genetics professionals. After an historical introduction to AI in understandable and practical terms, we review its limitations. Building upon this foundation, we discuss current AI applications in medicine, including genomics and genetic counseling, offering grounded ideas about the impact and role of AI in genetic counseling and delivery of genetic services. Since AI is already being used in genomics today, now is the time to fundamentally understand what it is, how it is being used, what its limitations are, and how it will continue to be integrated into genetics as we look ahead.

Related to many drug gene-product interactions, application of pharmacogenomics can lead to improved medication efficacy while decreasing or avoiding adverse drug reactions. However, utilizing pharmacogenomics without other information does not allow for optimal medication therapy. Currently, there is a lack of documentation of family medication history, in other words, inefficacy and adverse reactions across family members throughout generations. The family medication history can serve as an impetus for pharmacogenomic testing to explain lack of medication efficacy or an adverse drug reaction and pre-emptive testing can drive recognition and documentation of medication response in family members. We propose combining the family medication history via pedigree construction with pharmacogenomics to further optimize medication therapy. We encourage clinicians to combine family medication history with pharmacogenomics.

To investigate current policy and practice in postnatal depression in Scotland and to consider how effectively guidelines were addressed. A questionnaire survey of all National Health Service Boards in Scotland between September 2003 and February 2004 to determine what written policies for postnatal depression were in place as at September 2003. This was followed by a questionnaire survey of a representative sample of general practices in Scotland to determine the routine procedures in use for managing postnatal depression in general practice primary care teams. NHS Boards and general practices in Scotland, UK. Forty-seven per cent of policies and 68% of General Practices had implemented the majority of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network 60 evidence based recommendations. Practices were more likely than NHS Boards to have addressed a higher percentage of the recommendations (p < 0.05). Practices were more likely to implement antenatal screening for a history of puerperal psychosis if they were within NHS Boards that recommend this as routine practice. Practices within NHS Boards that had in-patient facilities for mother and baby admissions were more likely to identify these services as a treatment option than in the areas where the NHS Boards indicated the facilities were unavailable. Board guidance did not relate significantly to the likelihood of practices following the other evidence-based recommendations. Minimum standards represented by the SIGN 60 evidence-based recommendations were mostly followed in both policy and practice. If Board policy followed guidelines, the guidelines were more likely to be implemented at primary care level.

No abstract

No abstract