Literature DB >> 17609674

Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review.

Clara L Gaff1, Angus J Clarke, Paul Atkinson, Stephanie Sivell, Glyn Elwyn, Rachel Iredale, Hazel Thornton, Joanna Dundon, Chris Shaw, Adrian Edwards.   

Abstract

The communication of risk is a central activity in clinical genetics, with genetic health professionals encouraging the dissemination of relevant information by individuals to their at-risk family members. To understand the process by which communication occurs as well as its outcomes, a systematic review of actual communication in families about genetic risk was conducted. Findings from 29 papers meeting the inclusion criteria were summarised and are presented narratively. Family communication about genetic risk is described as a deliberative process, in which: sense is made of personal risk; the vulnerability and receptivity of the family member is assessed; decisions are made about what will be conveyed; and the right time to disclose is selected. The communication strategy adopted will depend on these factors and varies within families as well as between families. Inherent in these processes are conflicting senses of responsibility: to provide potentially valuable information and to prevent harm that may arise from this knowledge. However, the research 'outcomes' of communication have been professionally determined (number of relatives reported as informed, uptake of testing, knowledge of the recipient) and are typically unrelated to the concerns of the family member. The impact of communication on the individual, family members, and family relationships is of concern to the individual conveying the information, but this is largely self-reported. Currently, there is insufficient information to inform the development of theoretically and empirically based practice to foster 'good' communication. The implications for future research are discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17609674     DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201883

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  86 in total

Review 1.  Communicating genetic risk information within families: a review.

Authors:  Mel Wiseman; Caroline Dancyger; Susan Michie
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.375

2.  The development of a methodology for examining the process of family communication of genetic test results.

Authors:  Jonathan A Smith; Caroline Dancyger; Melissa Wallace; Chris Jacobs; Susan Michie
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-09-11       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Comparing family members' motivations and attitudes towards genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a qualitative analysis.

Authors:  Caroline Dancyger; Jonathan A Smith; Chris Jacobs; Melissa Wallace; Susan Michie
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-07-21       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Stigmatization and male identity: Norwegian males' experience after identification as BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Nina Strømsvik; Målfrid Råheim; Nina Oyen; Lars Fredrik Engebretsen; Eva Gjengedal
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-03-20       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Challenges of genetic testing in adolescents with cardiac arrhythmia syndromes.

Authors:  Lilian Liou Cohen; Marina Stolerman; Christine Walsh; David Wasserman; Siobhan M Dolan
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2011-09-27       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 6.  How communication of genetic information within the family is addressed in genetic counselling: a systematic review of research evidence.

Authors:  Álvaro Mendes; Milena Paneque; Liliana Sousa; Angus Clarke; Jorge Sequeiros
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-08-12       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  What does the duty to warn require?

Authors:  Seema K Shah; Sara Chandros Hull; Michael A Spinner; Benjamin E Berkman; Lauren A Sanchez; Ruquyyah Abdul-Karim; Amy P Hsu; Reginald Claypool; Steven M Holland
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 11.229

8.  Factors associated with experiences of genetic discrimination among individuals at risk for Huntington disease.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; JoAnne Palin; Jan M Friedman; Gerry Veenstra; Susan Creighton; Jane S Paulsen; Joan L Bottorff; Michael R Hayden
Journal:  Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 3.568

9.  Perceived intrafamily melanoma risk communication.

Authors:  Lois J Loescher; Janice D Crist; Leilani A C L Siaki
Journal:  Cancer Nurs       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.592

Review 10.  Decision making about cancer screening: an assessment of the state of the science and a suggested research agenda from the ASPO Behavioral Oncology and Cancer Communication Special Interest Group.

Authors:  Marc T Kiviniemi; Jennifer L Hay; Aimee S James; Isaac M Lipkus; Helen I Meissner; Michael Stefanek; Jamie L Studts; John F P Bridges; David R Close; Deborah O Erwin; Resa M Jones; Karen Kaiser; Kathryn M Kash; Kimberly M Kelly; Simon J Craddock Lee; Jason Q Purnell; Laura A Siminoff; Susan T Vadaparampil; Catharine Wang
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.