Harvard Catalyst Profiles

Contact, publication, and social network information about Harvard faculty and fellows.

Robert C Green, M.D.

Co-Author

This page shows the publications co-authored by Robert Green and Kurt Christensen.
Connection Strength

7.268
  1. A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone. Genet Med. 2018 01; 20(1):132-141.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.719
  2. Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing. J Pers Med. 2015 Dec 10; 5(4):470-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.643
  3. How could disclosing incidental information from whole-genome sequencing affect patient behavior? Per Med. 2013 Jun; 10(4).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.540
  4. Changes to perceptions of the pros and cons of genetic susceptibility testing after APOE genotyping for Alzheimer disease risk. Genet Med. 2011 May; 13(5):409-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.467
  5. Incorporating ethnicity into genetic risk assessment for Alzheimer disease: the REVEAL study experience. Genet Med. 2008 Mar; 10(3):207-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.375
  6. Returning actionable genomic results in a research biobank: Analytic validity, clinical implementation, and resource utilization. Am J Hum Genet. 2021 12 02; 108(12):2224-2237.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.242
  7. Behavioral and psychological impact of genome sequencing: a pilot randomized trial of primary care and cardiology patients. NPJ Genom Med. 2021 Aug 24; 6(1):72.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.239
  8. Primary care providers' responses to unsolicited Lynch syndrome secondary findings of varying clinical significance. Genet Med. 2021 10; 23(10):1977-1983.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.235
  9. Precision Population Medicine in Primary Care: The Sanford Chip Experience. Front Genet. 2021; 12:626845.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.231
  10. Disclosing genetic risk for Alzheimer's dementia to individuals with mild cognitive impairment. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2020; 6(1):e12002.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.216
  11. Cost Analyses of Genomic Sequencing: Lessons Learned from the MedSeq Project. Value Health. 2018 09; 21(9):1054-1061.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.193
  12. Short-term costs of integrating whole-genome sequencing into primary care and cardiology settings: a pilot randomized trial. Genet Med. 2018 12; 20(12):1544-1553.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.188
  13. Communication Predictors of Patient and Companion Satisfaction with Alzheimer's Genetic Risk Disclosure. J Health Commun. 2018; 23(8):807-814.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.185
  14. Preferences for the Return of Individual Results From Research on Pediatric Biobank Samples. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2017 04; 12(2):97-106.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.176
  15. Disclosing genetic risk of Alzheimer's disease to cognitively impaired patients and visit companions: Findings from the REVEAL Study. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 05; 100(5):927-935.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.172
  16. Adopting genetics: motivations and outcomes of personal genomic testing in adult adoptees. Genet Med. 2016 09; 18(9):924-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.162
  17. Disclosing Pleiotropic Effects During Genetic Risk Assessment for Alzheimer Disease: A Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 02; 164(3):155-63.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.162
  18. Are physicians prepared for whole genome sequencing? a qualitative analysis. Clin Genet. 2016 Feb; 89(2):228-34.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.156
  19. Associations between self-referral and health behavior responses to genetic risk information. Genome Med. 2015; 7(1):10.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  20. Factors affecting recall of different types of personal genetic information about Alzheimer's disease risk: the REVEAL study. Public Health Genomics. 2015; 18(2):78-86.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.151
  21. A randomized noninferiority trial of condensed protocols for genetic risk disclosure of Alzheimer's disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2015 Oct; 11(10):1222-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.150
  22. Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2013; 14:491-513.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.131
  23. Using Alzheimer's disease as a model for genetic risk disclosure: implications for personal genomics. Clin Genet. 2011 Nov; 80(5):407-14.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.118
  24. The reckoning: The return of genomic results to 1444 participants across the eMERGE3 Network. Genet Med. 2022 Feb 22.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.062
  25. Improved provider preparedness through an 8-part genetics and genomic education program. Genet Med. 2022 01; 24(1):214-224.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.061
  26. Psychosocial Effect of Newborn Genomic Sequencing on Families in the BabySeq Project: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Pediatr. 2021 11 01; 175(11):1132-1141.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.060
  27. Do research participants share genomic screening results with family members? J Genet Couns. 2022 Apr; 31(2):447-458.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.060
  28. Effects of participation in a U.S. trial of newborn genomic sequencing on parents at risk for depression. J Genet Couns. 2022 02; 31(1):218-229.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.059
  29. Universal newborn genetic screening for pediatric cancer predisposition syndromes: model-based insights. Genet Med. 2021 07; 23(7):1366-1371.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.058
  30. Airmen and health-care providers' attitudes toward the use of genomic sequencing in the US Air Force: findings from the MilSeq Project. Genet Med. 2020 12; 22(12):2003-2010.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.056
  31. Returning Results in the Genomic Era: Initial Experiences of the eMERGE Network. J Pers Med. 2020 Apr 27; 10(2).
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.054
  32. Quantifying Downstream Healthcare Utilization in Studies of Genomic Testing. Value Health. 2020 05; 23(5):559-565.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.054
  33. Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies. Genet Med. 2019 12; 21(12):2781-2790.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  34. Correction: Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and health-care costs from a multisite study. Genet Med. 2019 May; 21(5):1261-1262.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.051
  35. Secondary findings from clinical genomic sequencing: prevalence, patient perspectives, family history assessment, and health-care costs from a multisite study. Genet Med. 2019 05; 21(5):1100-1110.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.049
  36. The BabySeq project: implementing genomic sequencing in newborns. BMC Pediatr. 2018 07 09; 18(1):225.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.048
  37. Enhancing Autonomy in Biobank Decisions: Too Much of a Good Thing? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2018 04; 13(2):125-138.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.047
  38. Patient understanding of, satisfaction with, and perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing: findings from the MedSeq Project. Genet Med. 2018 09; 20(9):1069-1076.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  39. The impact of genetic counselors' use of facilitative strategies on cognitive and emotional processing of genetic risk disclosure for Alzheimer's disease. Patient Educ Couns. 2018 05; 101(5):817-823.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.046
  40. The Impact of Whole-Genome Sequencing on the Primary Care and Outcomes of Healthy Adult Patients: A Pilot Randomized Trial. Ann Intern Med. 2017 08 01; 167(3):159-169.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.045
  41. When bins blur: Patient perspectives on categories of results from clinical whole genome sequencing. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Apr-Jun; 8(2):82-88.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.043
  42. Family health history reporting is sensitive to small changes in wording. Genet Med. 2016 12; 18(12):1308-1311.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  43. Participants and Study Decliners' Perspectives About the Risks of Participating in a Clinical Trial of Whole Genome Sequencing. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2016 02; 11(1):21-30.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.041
  44. Patients' perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing for their healthcare: findings from the MedSeq project. Per Med. 2016 Jan 01; 13(1):13-20.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  45. Participant Satisfaction With a Preference-Setting Tool for the Return of Individual Research Results in Pediatric Genomic Research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Oct; 10(4):414-26.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.040
  46. Disclosing genetic risk for coronary heart disease: effects on perceived personal control and genetic counseling satisfaction. Clin Genet. 2016 Feb; 89(2):251-7.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  47. 'Someday it will be the norm': physician perspectives on the utility of genome sequencing for patient care in the MedSeq Project. Per Med. 2015; 12(1):23-32.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  48. A systematic approach to the reporting of medically relevant findings from whole genome sequencing. BMC Med Genet. 2014 Dec 14; 15:134.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.038
  49. The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine. Trials. 2014 Mar 20; 15:85.
    View in: PubMed
    Score: 0.036
Connection Strength
The connection strength for co-authors is the sum of the scores for each of their shared publications.

Publication scores are based on many factors, including how long ago they were written and whether the person is a first or senior author.
Funded by the NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences through its Clinical and Translational Science Awards Program, grant number UL1TR002541.