Table 4.

Citizens' perceptions and attitudes about genetic and/or omics tests (where investigated).

References	Perceptions about genetic/omics tests
Henneman et al. (2006)	Variable, almost half of respondents neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement that genetic testing carries more benefits than risks.
Skirton et al. (2006)	Positive, in particular for disease prevention and prevention for family members.
Calsbeek et al. (2007)	Positive, most participants approved genetic testing for the treatment of diseases (78% to 86%) or for early detection of diseases. However, some concerns were expressed, mostly related to the consequences of DNA-testing for taking out insurances.
Morren et al. (2007)	Variable. Just over two thirds said they would like to know if their disease is genetic. Thirty percentage said they did not want to know if they are at risk of a genetic disorder. If no appropriate treatment was available, over 40% of chronic patients would abstain from genetic test. Most respondents thought that the family should be informed of test results and would share the results with their children (70%) and siblings (65%).
Makeeva et al. (2009)	Positive, most participants stated that they would undergo tests and change their lifestyle based on the results.
Morin (2009)	Positive, nutrigenomics tests could have a positive impact on behavior/lifestyle. Worries about online purchase of genetic tests. Participants expressed a clear preference for in-person testing at a clinic or laboratory, for direct interaction with a healthcare professional.
Stewart-Knox et al. (2009)	Positive, 66% of participants said they would undergo a genetic test.
Hahn et al. (2010)	Variable/with doubts. Positive but with some skepticism.
Mai et al. (2011)	Positive, most participants stated that they would undergo a test even if not reimbursed. Most were against DTC genetic tests, most believed that a doctor should prescribe them and explain results.
Nielsen and El-Sohemy (2012)	Positive, nutrigenomics knowledge was considered useful to motivate people to change own lifestyle.
Bombard et al. (2013)	Variable/with doubts. Positive, but concerns for ethical issues for access to treatments based on genetics were expressed.
Haga et al. (2013)	Variable. 52% of participants stated they were interested in genetic testing and 45% said they were extremely interested. Most participants expressed positive attitudes toward the goals of genetic research and the use of genetic tests.
Henneman et al. (2013)	Variable, not everyone agreed that genetic tests make it possible to live longer or that they carry more benefits than harms. In 2010 more people (compared to 2002) believed that the use of genetic tests should be promoted, although 37% did not agree.
Nicholls et al. (2013)	Variable, basically positive attitudes.
Almeling (2014)	Most believed that healthcare professionals should be involved in explaining test results.
Vermeulen et al. (2014)	Variable. About half of the participants expressed interest in genetic testing for prevention of specific diseases (cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or dementia). According to participants, genetic tests should be performed in hospitals (66%) and addressed to curable (57%) or preventable (69%) diseases. Older participants said they wanted to know only about diseases that can be treated more often than younger ones (65% vs. 47%).
Etchegary et al. (2015)	Controversial, with concerns mostly related to data privacy and possible harmful uses of test results.
Graves et al. (2015)	Variable. The existence of a treatment (87%) and the severity of the disease (85%) were considered important in deciding which test results one wants to know.
Kaphingst et al. (2015)	Variable. Greater interest in genomics assessments among those with a limited health literacy.
Mavroidopoulou et al. (2015)	Positive. Genetic tests must be preceded by medical genetic counseling. Interest in undergoing a DTC genetic test was cost dependent.
Mählmann et al. (2016)	Positive, most participants were interested in undergoing genetic testing to know their own disease risk.
Miyamoto et al. (2016)	Variable. Positive toward genetic tests for drug susceptibility (48.5% of the interviewees showed positive attitudes, 29.7% did not know how to respond and 21.7% showed negative attitudes).
Simonstein and Mashiach-Eizenberg (2016)	Positive, most supported using genetic testing during pregnancy (86.7% believed that screening for genetic risk in potential parents is not wrong; 72.9% believed that all women planning a pregnancy should undergo a genetic test)
Fournier and Poulain (2018)	Mostly negative. Some interests toward nutrigenetic tests have been identified (for curiosity, scientific progress, early diagnosis), but much of the discussion has shown reluctance toward their adoption. Worries for dangerous use of the internet, criticism of science, deterministic aspect, fear of knowing, desire/right not to know, ethical issues, attachment to French food models were expressed.
Metcalfe et al. (2018)	Variable. Heterogeneous among participants. Positive attitude for tests for health conditions, especially for diseases for which there is treatment/cure.
Horrow et al. (2019)	Mostly positive. Most respondents attributed high value to their potential genetic test results. Some participants (35.2%) did express concern about the confidentiality of their genetic test results.
Pereira et al. (2019)	Mostly positive. Most patients (77%) were interested in finding out if they had pharmacogenetic variants or other genetic variants that were related to their health (73%).
Rebitschek et al. (2019)	Variable about epigenetic testing aimed to assess personal cancer risk. Participants' arguments in favor of epigenetic cancer risk assessment covered three major beliefs: guidance on one's individual medical strategy, the development of coping strategies (empowerment) by knowing one's risks, and a motivational push to healthier or more conscious living. Unnecessary worry about cancer risk and consequences, the uncertainty surrounding the test result, a perceived lack of test benefit were the main concerns that were brought up against testing.