Literature DB >> 18007141

Assessing hypothetical scenario methodology in genetic susceptibility testing analog studies: a quantitative review.

Susan Persky1, Kimberly A Kaphingst, Celeste M Condit, Colleen M McBride.   

Abstract

Hypothetical scenario methodology is commonly employed in the study of genetic susceptibility testing uptake estimation. The methodology, however, has not been rigorously assessed and sizeable gaps exist between estimated and actual uptake for tests that have recently become available. This quantitative review explores the effect of several theoretically based factors on genetic test uptake accuracy among a sample of 38 articles. These factors include verbal immediacy and temporal proximity of test scenarios, method of decision assessment, content of testing detail provided, processing demand required, and study features related to administration and sample. A number of assessed factors influenced uptake accuracy. Among these, temporal proximity of the genetic susceptibility test appeared to be the most consistent. There was also some evidence for effects of verbal immediacy and decision-assessment method on interest in testing. We recommend strategies for increasing accuracy using hypothetical scenario methodology to examine genetic susceptibility test uptake prediction.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18007141     DOI: 10.1097/gim.0b013e318159a344

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  44 in total

Review 1.  Patient decisions about breast cancer chemoprevention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mary E Ropka; Jess Keim; John T Philbrick
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2010-05-10       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results.

Authors:  J O'Daniel; S B Haga
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-05-07       Impact factor: 2.000

3.  Genetic susceptibility testing for chronic disease and intention for behavior change in healthy young adults.

Authors:  Jason L Vassy; Karen Donelan; Marie-France Hivert; Robert C Green; Richard W Grant
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-02-24

4.  Factors affecting breast cancer patients' need for genetic risk information: From information insufficiency to information need.

Authors:  Soo Jung Hong; Barbara Biesecker; Jennifer Ivanovich; Melody Goodman; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Effects of racial and ethnic group and health literacy on responses to genomic risk information in a medically underserved population.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Jewel D Stafford; Lucy D'Agostino McGowan; Joann Seo; Christina R Lachance; Melody S Goodman
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.267

6.  Blue Genes? Understanding and Mitigating Negative Consequences of Personalized Information about Genetic Risk for Depression.

Authors:  Matthew S Lebowitz; Woo-Kyoung Ahn
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Numeracy and Interpretation of Prognostic Estimates in Intracerebral Hemorrhage Among Surrogate Decision Makers in the Neurologic ICU.

Authors:  Nikita Leiter; Melissa Motta; Robert M Reed; Temitope Adeyeye; Debra L Wiegand; Nirav G Shah; Avelino C Verceles; Giora Netzer
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  A Qualitative Study of Anticipated Decision Making around Type 2 Diabetes Genetic Testing: the Role of Scientifically Concordant and Discordant Expectations.

Authors:  Alicia G Carmichael; Bailey B Hulswit; Emily J Moe; Toby Epstein Jayaratne; Beverly M Yashar
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  'Information is information': a public perspective on incidental findings in clinical and research genome-based testing.

Authors:  S Daack-Hirsch; M Driessnack; A Hanish; V A Johnson; L L Shah; C M Simon; J K Williams
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 10.  Growing up in the genomic era: implications of whole-genome sequencing for children, families, and pediatric practice.

Authors:  Christopher H Wade; Beth A Tarini; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2013-07-15       Impact factor: 8.929

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.