Literature DB >> 20070198

The behavioral response to personalized genetic information: will genetic risk profiles motivate individuals and families to choose more healthful behaviors?

Colleen M McBride1, Laura M Koehly, Saskia C Sanderson, Kimberly A Kaphingst.   

Abstract

This report describes the use of information emerging from genetic discovery to motivate risk-reducing health behaviors. Most research to date has evaluated the effects of information related to rare genetic variants on screening behaviors, in which genetic risk feedback has been associated consistently with improved screening adherence. The limited research with common genetic variants suggests that genetic information, when based on single-gene variants with low-risk probabilities, has little impact on behavior. The effect on behavioral outcomes of more realistic testing scenarios in which genetic risk is based on numerous genetic variants is largely unexplored. Little attention has been directed to matching genetic information to the literacy levels of target audiences. Another promising area for research is consideration of using genetic information to identify risk shared within kinship networks and to expand the influence of behavior change beyond the individual.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20070198     DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.012809.103532

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health        ISSN: 0163-7525            Impact factor:   21.981


  108 in total

1.  Effect of Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease on Information Seeking and Sharing: The MI-GENES Study (Myocardial Infarction Genes).

Authors:  Sherry-Ann N Brown; Hayan Jouni; Tariq S Marroush; Iftikhar J Kullo
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Genet       Date:  2017-08

2.  Implications of Internet availability of genomic information for public health practice.

Authors:  B W Hesse; N K Arora; M J Khoury
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2012-04-04       Impact factor: 2.000

3.  Direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing: a case study and practical recommendations for “genomic counseling”.

Authors:  Amy C Sturm; Kandamurugu Manickam
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Personal genomics and individual identities: motivations and moral imperatives of early users.

Authors:  Michelle L McGowan; Jennifer R Fishman; Marcie A Lambrix
Journal:  New Genet Soc       Date:  2010-09-01

5.  Dispositional optimism and perceived risk interact to predict intentions to learn genome sequencing results.

Authors:  Jennifer M Taber; William M P Klein; Rebecca A Ferrer; Katie L Lewis; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 4.267

6.  Learning one's genetic risk changes physiology independent of actual genetic risk.

Authors:  Bradley P Turnwald; J Parker Goyer; Danielle Z Boles; Amy Silder; Scott L Delp; Alia J Crum
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2018-12-10

7.  'Someday it will be the norm': physician perspectives on the utility of genome sequencing for patient care in the MedSeq Project.

Authors:  Jason L Vassy; Kurt D Christensen; Melody J Slashinski; Denise M Lautenbach; Sridharan Raghavan; Jill Oliver Robinson; Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby; Lindsay Zausmer Feuerman; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Michael F Murray; Robert C Green; Amy L McGuire
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Introducing genetic testing for cardiovascular disease in primary care: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jo B Middlemass; Momina F Yazdani; Joe Kai; Penelope J Standen; Nadeem Qureshi
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 5.386

9.  How can psychological science inform research about genetic counseling for clinical genomic sequencing?

Authors:  Cynthia M Khan; Christine Rini; Barbara A Bernhardt; J Scott Roberts; Kurt D Christensen; James P Evans; Kyle B Brothers; Myra I Roche; Jonathan S Berg; Gail E Henderson
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 10.  Genetic susceptibility testing for neurodegenerative diseases: ethical and practice issues.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; Wendy R Uhlmann
Journal:  Prog Neurobiol       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 11.685

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.