Literature DB >> 18373401

Evaluating online direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests: informed choices or buyers beware?

Rose Geransar1, Edna Einsiedel.   

Abstract

Commercialization of genetic technologies is expanding the horizons for the marketing and sales of genetic tests direct-to-consumers (DTCs). This study assesses the information provision and access requirements that are in place for genetic tests that are being advertised DTC over the Internet. Sets of key words specific to DTC genetic testing were entered into popular Internet search engines to generate a list of 24 companies engaging in DTC advertising. Company requirements for physician mediation, genetic counseling arrangements, and information provision were coded to develop categories for quantitative analysis within each variable. Results showed that companies offering risk assessment and diagnostic testing were most likely to require that testing be mediated by a clinician, and to recommend physician-arranged counseling. Companies offering enhancement testing were less likely to require physician mediation of services and more likely to provide long-distance genetic counseling. DTC advertisements often provided information on disease etiology; this was most common in the case of multifactorial diseases. The majority of companies cited outside sources to support the validity of claims about clinical utility of the tests being advertised; companies offering risk assessment tests most frequently cited all information sources. DTC advertising for genetic tests that lack independent professional oversight raises troubling questions about appropriate use and interpretation of these tests by consumers and carries implications for the standards of patient care. These implications are discussed in the context of a public healthcare system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18373401     DOI: 10.1089/gte.2007.0024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Test        ISSN: 1090-6576


  24 in total

1.  An exploration of genetic health professionals' experience with direct-to-consumer genetic testing in their clinical practice.

Authors:  Gemma R Brett; Sylvia A Metcalfe; David J Amor; Jane L Halliday
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Genetic counseling and the ethical issues around direct to consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Alice K Hawkins; Anita Ho
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Expanding roles: a survey of public health genetic counselors.

Authors:  Karen Potter Powell; Lianne Hasegawa; Kirsty McWalter
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing.

Authors:  David J Kaufman; Juli M Bollinger; Rachel L Dvoskin; Joan A Scott
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Introduction to the special issue: psychological aspects of genomics and child health.

Authors:  Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2008-12-06

6.  Parents' attitudes toward pediatric genetic testing for common disease risk.

Authors:  Kenneth P Tercyak; Sharon Hensley Alford; Karen M Emmons; Isaac M Lipkus; Benjamin S Wilfond; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Negotiating the boundary between medicine and consumer culture: online marketing of nutrigenetic tests.

Authors:  Paula M Saukko; Matthew Reed; Nicky Britten; Stuart Hogarth
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Breast cancer in the personal genomics era.

Authors:  Rachel E Ellsworth; David J Decewicz; Craig D Shriver; Darrell L Ellsworth
Journal:  Curr Genomics       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 2.236

9.  Consumers' use of web-based information and their decisions about multiplex genetic susceptibility testing.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Colleen M McBride; Christopher Wade; Sharon Hensley Alford; Lawrence C Brody; Andreas D Baxevanis
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Rachel Mills; William Barry; Susanne B Haga
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.