Literature DB >> 15539044

Factors influencing intention to obtain a genetic test for a hereditary disease in an affected group and in the general public.

Karin Nordin1, Jan Björk, Gunilla Berglund.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To ensure successful implementations of genetic screening in the future, the attitudes of the public are an important factor to consider. The primary aim of this study is to investigate the intention to take a genetic test for an unidentified hereditary disease. A further objective is to assess the predictive values of attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived personal control on the intention to take a genetic test. These aims are investigated in two groups differing in their experience and knowledge of genetic testing.
METHOD: A questionnaire was developed according to the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and mailed to a random sample of 1000 persons from the general public and to 330 persons in FAP families. The response rate was 60% and 74%, respectively.
RESULTS: The probability of taking a genetic test was high in both groups but significantly higher in the FAP group. The attitudes of the FAP group were significantly more positive when compared to the attitudes of the general public. For the persons in the FAP group, the most significant others in the decision to take a genetic test were their children, whereas spouses proved to be the most important significant others in the general public. The most important predictor of the intention to take a test in both groups was attitude, accounting for 64% of the variance.
CONCLUSIONS: The study indicated that most of the individuals in the FAP group and many in the general public intended to take a genetic test. Our findings suggest that living in an affected group and having some kind of experience of a hereditary disease may lead to an even more positive attitude to genetic testing. Using the TPB, attitudes were found to be the strongest predictor of intention to take a genetic test in both groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15539044     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.04.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  10 in total

Review 1.  How risk is perceived, constructed and interpreted by clients in clinical genetics, and the effects on decision making: systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie Sivell; Glyn Elwyn; Clara L Gaff; Angus J Clarke; Rachel Iredale; Chris Shaw; Joanna Dundon; Hazel Thornton; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Psychosocial determinants of intention to screen for Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  James E Galvin; Qiang Fu; Joseph T Nguyen; Cristie Glasheen; Darcell P Scharff
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 21.566

3.  What patients and their relatives think about testing for BMPR2.

Authors:  Diana L Jones; Joanne C Sandberg; Mary J Rosenthal; Robert C Saunders; Vickie L Hannig; Ellen W Clayton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 4.  Predictors of genetic testing decisions: a systematic review and critique of the literature.

Authors:  Kate Sweeny; Arezou Ghane; Angela M Legg; Ho Phi Huynh; Sara E Andrews
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-04-11       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Modelling decisions to undergo genetic testing for susceptibility to common health conditions: an ancillary study of the Multiplex Initiative.

Authors:  Christopher H Wade; Shoshana Shiloh; Samuel W Woolford; J Scott Roberts; Sharon Hensley Alford; Theresa M Marteau; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Psychol Health       Date:  2011-06-09

6.  Knowledge and Attitudes toward Genetic Testing for Autism Spectrum Disorders among Parents of Affected Children in Taiwan.

Authors:  Ming Li; Shi-Xi Zhao; Wei-Ju Chen; Tse-Yang Huang; Lei-Shih Chen
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 4.096

7.  Ethnicity, educational level and attitudes contribute to parental intentions about genetic testing for child obesity.

Authors:  Paul L Kocken; Meinou H C Theunissen; Yvonne Schönbeck; Lidewij Henneman; A Cecile J W Janssens; Symone B Detmar
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-02-07

8.  Preparing individuals to communicate genetic test results to their relatives: report of a randomized control trial.

Authors:  Susan V Montgomery; Andrea M Barsevick; Brian L Egleston; Ruth Bingler; Karen Ruth; Suzanne M Miller; John Malick; Terrence P Cescon; Mary B Daly
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 2.375

9.  On averages and peaks: how do people integrate attitudes about multiple diseases to reach a decision about multiplex genetic testing?

Authors:  Shoshana Shiloh; Christopher H Wade; J Scott Roberts; Sharon Hensley Alford; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2012-11-05       Impact factor: 2.583

10.  Disentangling the determinants of interest and willingness-to-pay for breast cancer susceptibility testing in the general population: a cross-sectional Web-based survey among women of Québec (Canada).

Authors:  Jolyane Blouin-Bougie; Nabil Amara; Karine Bouchard; Jacques Simard; Michel Dorval
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 2.692

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.