Literature DB >> 18207694

Interventions to improve risk communication in clinical genetics: systematic review.

A Edwards1, J Gray, A Clarke, J Dundon, G Elwyn, C Gaff, K Hood, R Iredale, S Sivell, C Shaw, H Thornton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Effective risk communication may enable clients to participate effectively in decision-making about their health and health care. A systematic review of existing literature on risk communication in genetics, and its effects on key outcomes for clients, was undertaken.
METHOD: Systematic searching of six electronic databases and data extraction from included studies; narrative synthesis of results.
RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were included, principally from cancer genetics. Sixteen communication interventions have been evaluated, generally showing improvements in cognitive outcomes for users, such as knowledge, understanding and risk perception, and without adverse effects on anxiety, cancer-related worry and depression. However, often it was the supportive or emotional elements of counselling that provided benefits to users, rather than the informational or educational elements. Similar results were found in 12 further studies of decision aids which also appear to achieve shorter consultations that can focus more on the supportive elements of counselling.
CONCLUSION: For both communication models and decision aids, the supportive or emotional elements of counselling provided more benefits to users than the informational or educational elements. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Debate is required on how to strike a balance between the medical model, its agenda and perceived requirements to disclose or discuss a range of issues and the sometimes competing goals of addressing users' concerns, needs for support, issues of loss and relationship problems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18207694     DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.11.026

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  48 in total

1.  Genetics Health Professionals' Views on Quality of Genetic Counseling Service Provision for Presymptomatic Testing in Late-Onset Neurological Diseases in Portugal: Core Components, Specific Challenges and the Need for Assessment Tools.

Authors:  M Paneque; Á Mendes; L Guimarães; J Sequeiros; H Skirton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Re-conceptualizing risk in genetic counseling: implications for clinical practice.

Authors:  Jehannine C Austin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-01-30       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  The effect of genetic test-based risk information on behavioral outcomes: A critical examination of failed trials and a call to action.

Authors:  Jehannine Austin
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 2.802

4.  From constraints to opportunities? Provision of psychosocial support in portuguese oncogenetic counseling services.

Authors:  Alvaro Mendes; Liliana Sousa; Milena Paneque
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Effects of a genetic counseling model on mothers of children with down syndrome: a Brazilian pilot study.

Authors:  Marcos Ricardo Datti Micheletto; Nelson Iguimar Valerio; Agnes Cristina Fett-Conte
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-06-23       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  The Efficacy of Genetic Counseling for Psychiatric Disorders: a Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ramona Moldovan; Sebastian Pintea; Jehannine Austin
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 7.  Patient responses to genetic information: studies of patients with hereditary cancer syndromes identify issues for use of genetic testing in nephrology practice.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Semin Nephrol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 5.299

8.  A randomized noninferiority trial of condensed protocols for genetic risk disclosure of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Robert C Green; Kurt D Christensen; L Adrienne Cupples; Norman R Relkin; Peter J Whitehouse; Charmaine D M Royal; Thomas O Obisesan; Robert Cook-Deegan; Erin Linnenbringer; Melissa Barber Butson; Grace-Ann Fasaye; Elana Levinson; J Scott Roberts
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 21.566

9.  An information-centric framework for designing patient-centered medical decision aids and risk communication.

Authors:  Lyndsey Franklin; Catherine Plaisant; Ben Shneiderman
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2013-11-16

10.  Multiple sclerosis patients' benefit-risk preferences: serious adverse event risks versus treatment efficacy.

Authors:  F Reed Johnson; George Van Houtven; Semra Ozdemir; Steve Hass; Jeff White; Gordon Francis; David W Miller; J Theodore Phillips
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2009-04-27       Impact factor: 4.849

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.