Literature DB >> 17295053

Attitudes toward fragile X mutation carrier testing from women identified in a general population survey.

Aimee Anido1, Lisa M Carlson, Stephanie L Sherman.   

Abstract

Fragile X syndrome is primarily due to a CGG repeat expansion found in the FMR1 X-linked gene. In a previous study, we conducted focus groups with women to assess their attitudes towards fragile X carrier screening. In this follow-up study, we conducted in-depth interviews of general population reproductive-age women who were identified as carriers. We explored their attitudes toward testing for carrier status of the fragile X mutation. These women underwent screening primarily to participate in a research project rather than in search of a diagnosis for specific symptoms. As such, these women were wholly unprepared for positive carrier results. Their responses about their results and carrier screening, in many cases, were being worked out over the course of the interview itself. The most salient finding of this work is the apparent lack of relevance of carrier status to these women. Many expressed that although the information could be relevant in the future, it is not relevant at this stage of their lives in terms of family planning (either with respect to having unaffected offspring or to premature ovarian failure) and personal relationships. Although issues of abortion seemed prominent in the focus groups, we found that carrier status did not have an apparent effect on women's attitudes about termination. We hypothesize this may be related to the fact that women had not processed their new carrier status and had not related it to previously-formed personal opinions. The findings of this work have significant implications for genetic counseling and population screening. Genetic counselors should be mindful that general population women may not recognize the immediate importance of their carrier status even when literature is provided and discussed prior to providing a sample. As part of comprehensive genetic counseling, counselors should identify the reproductive life stage of the woman receiving the new information and help her identify when this information would be more meaningful in her life. Counselors can assist in setting up a personalized road map with specific types of services that will be more applicable to the woman as her carrier status becomes more relevant.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17295053     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-006-9049-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  11 in total

1.  Interpretative phenomenological analysis and the new genetics.

Authors:  Elizabeth Chapman; Jonathan A Smith
Journal:  J Health Psychol       Date:  2002-03

2.  Women's attitudes toward testing for fragile X carrier status: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Aimee Anido; Lisa M Carlson; Lisa Taft; Stephanie L Sherman
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Parental attitudes regarding carrier testing in children at risk for fragile X syndrome.

Authors:  A McConkie-Rosell; G A Spiridigliozzi; K Rounds; D V Dawson; J A Sullivan; D Burgess; A M Lachiewicz
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1999-01-29

4.  Fragile X syndrome carrier screening in the prenatal genetic counseling setting.

Authors:  Amy Cronister; Miriam DiMaio; Maurice J Mahoney; Alan E Donnenfeld; Stephanie Hallam
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Attitudes towards reproductive issues and carrier testing among adult patients and parents of children with cystic fibrosis (CF).

Authors:  L Henneman; I Bramsen; T A Van Os; I E Reuling; H G Heyerman; J van der Laag; H M van der Ploeg; L P ten Kate
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  Carrier testing in the fragile X syndrome: attitudes and opinions of obligate carriers.

Authors:  A McConkie-Rosell; G A Spiridigliozzi; T Iafolla; J Tarleton; A M Lachiewicz
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1997-01-10

7.  Carrier testing in fragile X syndrome: effect on self-concept.

Authors:  A McConkie-Rosell; G A Spiridigliozzi; J A Sullivan; D V Dawson; A M Lachiewicz
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  2000-06-19

8.  Lack of interest by nonpregnant couples in population-based cystic fibrosis carrier screening.

Authors:  E W Clayton; V L Hannig; J P Pfotenhauer; R A Parker; P W Campbell; J A Phillips
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 9.  Newborn screening for fragile X syndrome.

Authors:  Donald B Bailey
Journal:  Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev       Date:  2004

10.  Prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis: psychological effects on carriers and their partners.

Authors:  M E Mennie; M E Compton; A Gilfillan; W A Liston; I Pullen; D A Whyte; D J Brock
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 6.318

View more
  16 in total

1.  Carrier screening in preconception consultation in primary care.

Authors:  Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-12-20

2.  "It gives them more options": preferences for preconception genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome in primary healthcare.

Authors:  Alison D Archibald; Chriselle L Hickerton; Samantha A Wake; Alice M Jaques; Jonathan Cohen; Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2016-02-03

Review 3.  Can we make assumptions about the psychosocial impact of living as a carrier, based on studies assessing the effects of carrier testing?

Authors:  Celine Lewis; Heather Skirton; Ray Jones
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Extended family impact of genetic testing: the experiences of X-linked carrier grandmothers.

Authors:  Anna Lehmann; Beverley S Speight; Lauren Kerzin-Storrar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Newborn screening and cascade testing for FMR1 mutations.

Authors:  Page L Sorensen; Louise W Gane; Mark Yarborough; Randi J Hagerman; Flora Tassone
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2012-12-13       Impact factor: 2.802

6.  Psychosocial Responses to being Identified as a Balanced Chromosomal Translocation Carrier: a Qualitative Investigation of Parents in Japan.

Authors:  Mikiko Kaneko; Hirofumi Ohashi; Tomoko Takamura; Hiroshi Kawame
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Attitude of medical school students in China towards genetic testing and counseling issues in FXS.

Authors:  Jia Li; Wen Huang; Shiyu Luo; Yunting Lin; Ranhui Duan
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Preconception carrier screening for multiple disorders: evaluation of a screening offer in a Dutch founder population.

Authors:  Inge B Mathijssen; Kim C A Holtkamp; Cecile P E Ottenheim; Janneke M C van Eeten-Nijman; Phillis Lakeman; Hanne Meijers-Heijboer; Merel C van Maarle; Lidewij Henneman
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Recommendations from multi-disciplinary focus groups on cascade testing and genetic counseling for fragile X-associated disorders.

Authors:  Allyn McConkie-Rosell; Liane Abrams; Brenda Finucane; Amy Cronister; Louise W Gane; Sarah M Coffey; Stephanie Sherman; Lawrence M Nelson; Elizabeth Berry-Kravis; David Hessl; Sufen Chiu; Natalie Street; Ajay Vatave; Randi J Hagerman
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-05-12       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Emotional reaction to fragile X premutation carrier tests among infertile women.

Authors:  Lisa M Pastore; Wendy L Morris; Logan B Karns
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.