Citation: Journal of Healthcare Engineering. 2018:9541621, 2018..Journal: Journal of healthcare engineering.Published: ; 2018ISSN: 2040-2295.Full author list: Wynn RM; Adams KT; Kowalski RL; Shivega WG; Ratwani RM; Miller KE.UI/PMID: 30250657.Subject(s): IN PROCESS -- NOT YET INDEXEDInstitution(s): MedStar Institute for InnovationDepartment(s): National Center for Human Factors in HealthcareActivity type: Journal Article.Medline article type(s): Journal Article | ReviewOnline resources: Click here to access onlineDigital Object Identifier: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/9541621 (Click here)ORCID: Wynn, Rachel M https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0345-5313 (Click here)Abbreviated citation: J. healthc. eng.. 2018:9541621, 2018.Abstract: Precision medicine (PM) has the potential to tailor healthcare to the individual patient by using their genetic information to guide treatment choices. However, this process is complex and difficult to understand for patients and providers alike. With a recent push in the healthcare community to understand the patient experience and engage patients in their care, it is important to give patients the opportunity to learn about PM. We performed a systematic review to identify previous work assessing the quality of patient-facing PM materials from 2008 to July 2018. Ten studies were identified, which used varying methods and measures. A qualitative assessment was conducted to compare key elements of the studies, including study design, characteristics of the participant population, what measurements were used to assess the PM materials, understandability, preference, psychological reactions, and the type of PM materials being assessed. The studies identified provide important groundwork by highlighting consistent aspects of design that aid in comprehension. Eight of the ten studies focused on the content and organization of genomic test results, while the remaining two assessed educational tools. Two main design elements that appeared across the studies were appropriately designed visual aids and simplified language. The studies identified were limited by the participant populations that were used, which were primarily white and well educated. Only one study attempted to oversample patient populations typically underrepresented in this type of research. Through our systematic review, it is evident that the breadth of knowledge in this field is limited in scope and that more work must be done to ensure that patients can engage in their care when faced with PM.