Literature DB >> 11845557

Predictive genetic testing: high risk expectations in the face of low risk information.

Susan Michie1, John Weinman, Julie Miller, Veronica Collins, Jane Halliday, Theresa M Marteau.   

Abstract

The aims of this cross-sectional, questionnaire study were (1) to estimate the proportion of those receiving negative ("low risk") results following predictive genetic testing who expect to undergo clinically unnecessary future screening and (2) to examine the factors associated with this expectation. Of 127 adults receiving negative results following predictive genetic testing for familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), 54 people (42%) were expected to attend for future bowel screening. The main predictor was doubt about the accuracy of genetic test results. Expecting to attend was also associated univariately with perceiving the chance of developing FAP as higher, being more worried about this, perceiving the test result to be more uncertain and threatening, and holding a behavioral model of the cause of FAP. Attendance for health screening may be influenced by people's perception of the accuracy of genetic tests that they have undergone. Future research should investigate test presentation and influences on test perception.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11845557     DOI: 10.1023/a:1013537701374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Behav Med        ISSN: 0160-7715


  15 in total

1.  Likelihood of attending bowel screening after a negative genetic test result: the possible influence of health professionals.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Veronica Collins; Jane Halliday; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2002

Review 2.  Hypochondriasis.

Authors:  H M Warwick; P M Salkovskis
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  1990

3.  Optimism, coping, and health: assessment and implications of generalized outcome expectancies.

Authors:  M F Scheier; C S Carver
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 4.267

Review 4.  Psychological consequences of predictive genetic testing: a systematic review.

Authors:  M Broadstock; S Michie; T Marteau
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Failure of a negative exercise test to reassure patients with chest pain.

Authors:  K S Channer; M A James; M Papouchado; J R Rees
Journal:  Q J Med       Date:  1987-04

6.  DNA screening for breast/ovarian cancer susceptibility based on linked markers. A family study.

Authors:  H T Lynch; P Watson; T A Conway; J F Lynch; S M Slominski-Caster; S A Narod; J Feunteun; G Lenoir
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1993-09-13

7.  The hospital anxiety and depression scale.

Authors:  A S Zigmond; R P Snaith
Journal:  Acta Psychiatr Scand       Date:  1983-06       Impact factor: 6.392

8.  Factors influencing demand for primary medical care in women aged 20-44 years: a preliminary report.

Authors:  M H Banks; S A Beresford; D C Morrell; J J Waller; C J Watkins
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI).

Authors:  T M Marteau; H Bekker
Journal:  Br J Clin Psychol       Date:  1992-09

10.  Impact of Event Scale: a measure of subjective stress.

Authors:  M Horowitz; N Wilner; W Alvarez
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  1979-05       Impact factor: 4.312

View more
  14 in total

1.  Predictive genetic testing: mediators and moderators of anxiety.

Authors:  Susan Michie; David P French; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2002

2.  To test or not to test? Moderators of the relationship between risk perceptions and interest in predictive genetic testing.

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh; Shiri Ilan
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2005-09-30

3.  Imaging or imagining? A neuroethics challenge informed by genetics.

Authors:  Judy Illes; Eric Racine
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 4.  Illness representations, self-regulation, and genetic counseling: a theoretical review.

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Intuition versus cognition: a qualitative exploration of how women understand and manage their increased breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Louise Heiniger; Phyllis N Butow; Margaret Charles; Melanie A Price
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  2015-03-28

6.  Value of Genetic Testing for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer in a Probability-Based US Online Sample.

Authors:  Sara J Knight; Ateesha F Mohamed; Deborah A Marshall; Uri Ladabaum; Kathryn A Phillips; Judith M E Walsh
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Self-Regulation Principles Underlying Risk Perception and Decision Making within the Context of Genomic Testing.

Authors:  Linda D Cameron; Barbara Bowles Biesecker; Ellen Peters; Jennifer M Taber; William M P Klein
Journal:  Soc Personal Psychol Compass       Date:  2017-05-05

8.  Melanoma genetic counseling and test reporting improve screening adherence among unaffected carriers 2 years later.

Authors:  Lisa G Aspinwall; Jennifer M Taber; Samantha L Leaf; Wendy Kohlmann; Sancy A Leachman
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-08-15       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Perceived risk following melanoma genetic testing: a 2-year prospective study distinguishing subjective estimates from recall.

Authors:  Lisa G Aspinwall; Jennifer M Taber; Wendy Kohlmann; Samantha L Leaf; Sancy A Leachman
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-12-10       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Health behaviors in patients and families with hereditary colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Allison M Burton; Shelly R Hovick; Susan K Peterson
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2012-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.