Literature DB >> 17298604

Patient decision-making for clinical genetics.

Gwen Anderson1.   

Abstract

Medicine is incorporating genetic services into all avenues of health-care, ranging from the rarest to the most common diseases. Cognitive theories of decision-making still dominate professionals' understanding of patient decision-making about how to use genetic information and whether to have testing. I discovered a conceptual model of decision-making while carrying out a phenomenological-hermeneutic descriptive study of a convenience sample of 12 couples who were interviewed while deciding whether to undergo prenatal genetic testing. Thirty-two interviews were conducted with 12 men and 12 women separately. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and all data were analyzed using three levels of coding that were sorted into 30 categories and then abstracted into three emergent meta-themes that described men's and women's attempts to make sense and find meaning in how to best use prenatal genetic technology. Their descriptions of how they thought about, communicated, and coped with their decision were so detailed it was possible to discern nine different types of thinking they engaged in while deciding to accept or decline testing. They believed that decision-making is a process of working through your own personal style of thinking. This might include only one or any combination of the following types of thinking: analytical, ethical, moral, reflective, practical, hypothetical, judgmental, scary, and second sight, as described in detail by these 12 couples.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17298604     DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2007.00349.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nurs Inq        ISSN: 1320-7881            Impact factor:   2.393


  7 in total

1.  Shock, adjust, decide: reproductive decision making in cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier couples--a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jessica Myring; William Beckett; Rupinder Jassi; Theresa Roberts; Richard Sayers; Diana Scotcher; Marion McAllister
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2011-04-05       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  A Qualitative Study to Explore the Views and Attitudes towards Prenatal Testing in Adults Who Have Muenke Syndrome and their Partners.

Authors:  Julie Phipps; Heather Skirton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  It's complicated - Factors predicting decisional conflict in prenatal diagnostic testing.

Authors:  Cécile Muller; Linda D Cameron
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 3.377

4.  Exploring informed choice in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study.

Authors:  Beth K Potter; Natasha O'Reilly; Holly Etchegary; Heather Howley; Ian D Graham; Mark Walker; Doug Coyle; Yelena Chorny; Mario Cappelli; Isabelle Boland; Brenda J Wilson
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09-16       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Influence of scary beliefs about the Tuskegee Syphilis Study on willingness to participate in research.

Authors:  Jenna L Davis; B Lee Green; Ralph V Katz
Journal:  ABNF J       Date:  2012

6.  Clinical Care at the Genomic Interface: Current Genetic Issues in Neonatal Nursing.

Authors:  Lauren Thorngate; Chantel A E V Rios
Journal:  Newborn Infant Nurs Rev       Date:  2008-03

7.  Hereditary diseases and child wish: exploring motives, considerations, and the (joint) decision-making process of genetically at-risk couples.

Authors:  Y Severijns; C E M de Die-Smulders; T Gültzow; H de Vries; L A D M van Osch
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-02-20
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.