There are currently different research programs in place to assess the effects of predictive testing for a few late-onset disorders, including Huntington disease (HD) and familial cancers. Prior to providing predictive testing as a service, we sought the views of both the patients and the clinicians as to the importance and value of different items in a research protocol for HD. We mailed questionnaires to 41 clinicians and 351 at-risk patients who had participated in the research protocol, to solicit their opinions on the relative importance of various components of the HD predictive testing research protocol. Completed questionnaires were received from 256 patients (73%) and 33 clinicians (80%). Most participants (96%) were satisfied with the program, and < 3% of persons receiving a modification of risk felt that predictive testing had impaired their quality of life. While there was consensus on the importance of most components of the protocol, significantly more clinicians than patients (97% vs. 72%; P = 0.02) felt it was essential to keep written material about HD as part of a service protocol. More patients than clinicians (83% vs. 27%) considered it essential to have 24-hr contact numbers following disclosure of test results (P < 0.0001). Patients also felt more strongly about the importance of counseling about technical aspects of predictive testing (84% vs. 77%; P < 0.02), and about having a support person attend counselling sessions with the patient (62% vs. 48%; P = 0.04). Nearly 25% of participants indicated that they would not want their general practitioner routinely involved in the predictive testing program. These findings have influenced the development of our service protocol, and they underscore the importance of involving both providers and consumers of predictive testing in the development of a service protocol for genetic testing.