PURPOSE: To assess the lay public's knowledge of, and beliefs about, genetics and genetic testing to create an educational initiative that promotes acceptance and utilization of genomic medicine in primary health care. METHODS: A telephone survey of English-speaking adults in Guilford County, North Carolina was conducted in 2006 to identify community members' educational needs regarding genetics and genetic testing. RESULTS: Most respondents recognized the connection between family history and disease risk. A majority did not appear to know about: (1) basic principles of inheritance, (2) laws prohibiting genetic discrimination, and (3) the availability and limitations of genetic tests. About 25% thought that they could not reduce their risk if they have a genetic predisposition for disease. Knowledge level was affected by education, experience, age, and race. CONCLUSION: If primary care providers use family history as a risk assessment tool, community education programs must address (1) the collection of family health history, (2) legislation regarding genetic nondiscrimination, (3) benefits and limitations of existing genetic tests, and (4) genetic determinism. Programs emphasizing practical, "how to" information can be targeted to individuals likely to collect family history information and address misperceptions about discrimination, testing, and determinism.
PURPOSE: To assess the lay public's knowledge of, and beliefs about, genetics and genetic testing to create an educational initiative that promotes acceptance and utilization of genomic medicine in primary health care. METHODS: A telephone survey of English-speaking adults in Guilford County, North Carolina was conducted in 2006 to identify community members' educational needs regarding genetics and genetic testing. RESULTS: Most respondents recognized the connection between family history and disease risk. A majority did not appear to know about: (1) basic principles of inheritance, (2) laws prohibiting genetic discrimination, and (3) the availability and limitations of genetic tests. About 25% thought that they could not reduce their risk if they have a genetic predisposition for disease. Knowledge level was affected by education, experience, age, and race. CONCLUSION: If primary care providers use family history as a risk assessment tool, community education programs must address (1) the collection of family health history, (2) legislation regarding genetic nondiscrimination, (3) benefits and limitations of existing genetic tests, and (4) genetic determinism. Programs emphasizing practical, "how to" information can be targeted to individuals likely to collect family history information and address misperceptions about discrimination, testing, and determinism.
Authors: Carol A Christianson; Karen Potter Powell; Susan Estabrooks Hahn; Susan H Blanton; Jessica Bogacik; Vincent C Henrich Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2012-01-21 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Lynn G Dressler; Sondra Smolek Jones; Janell M Markey; Katherine W Byerly; Megan C Roberts Journal: Genet Test Mol Biomarkers Date: 2014-02-04
Authors: Tara J Schmidlen; Laura Scheinfeldt; Ruixue Zhaoyang; Rachel Kasper; Kevin Sweet; Erynn S Gordon; Margaret Keller; Cathy Stack; Neda Gharani; Mary B Daly; Joseph Jarvis; Michael F Christman Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Harlyn G Skinner; Larissa Calancie; Maihan B Vu; Beverly Garcia; Molly DeMarco; Cam Patterson; Alice Ammerman; Jonathan C Schisler Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-04 Impact factor: 3.240