Literature DB >> 20935315

Understanding preferences for disclosure of individual biomarker results among participants in a longitudinal birth cohort.

Stephen E Wilson1, Erin R Baker, Anthony C Leonard, Mark H Eckman, Bruce P Lanphear.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To describe the preferences for disclosure of individual biomarker results among mothers participating in a longitudinal birth cohort.
METHODS: We surveyed 343 mothers that participated in the Health Outcomes and Measures of the Environment Study about their biomarker disclosure preferences. Participants were told that the study was measuring pesticide metabolites in their biological specimens, and that the health effects of these low levels of exposure are unknown. Participants were asked whether they wanted to receive their results and their child's results. In addition, they were asked about their preferred method (letter vs in person) and format (more complex vs less complex) for disclosure of results.
RESULTS: Almost all of the study participants wanted to receive their individual results (340/343) as well as their child's results (342/343). However, preferences for receiving results differed by education level. Mothers with less than a college degree preferred in-person disclosure of results more often than mothers with some college education or a college degree (34.3% vs 17.4% vs 7.9%, p<0.001). Similarly, mothers with less than a college education preferred a less complex disclosure format than mothers with some college education or a college degree (59.7% vs 79.1% vs 86.3%, p<0.0001).
CONCLUSION: While almost all study participants preferred to receive results of their individual biomarker tests, level of education was a key factor in predicting preferences for disclosure of biomarker results. To ensure effective communication of this information, disclosure of biomarker results should be tailored to the education level of the study participants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20935315     DOI: 10.1136/jme.2010.036517

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  5 in total

1.  Toxic environmental chemicals: the role of reproductive health professionals in preventing harmful exposures.

Authors:  Patrice Sutton; Tracey J Woodruff; Joanne Perron; Naomi Stotland; Jeanne A Conry; Mark D Miller; Linda C Giudice
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  Disclosure of individualized research results: a precautionary approach.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 2.622

3.  Mobile and Traditional Modes of Communication Among Male Latino Farmworkers: Implications for Health Communication and Dissemination.

Authors:  Joanne C Sandberg; Chaya R Spears Johnson; Ha T Nguyen; Jennifer W Talton; Sara A Quandt; Haiying Chen; Phillip Summers; Thomas A Arcury
Journal:  J Immigr Minor Health       Date:  2016-06

4.  Advising parents in the face of scientific uncertainty: an environmental health dilemma.

Authors:  Naomi Lubick
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 9.031

5.  Disclosure of research results: a randomized study on GENEPSO-PS cohort participants.

Authors:  Julien Mancini; Elodie Le Cozannet; Anne-Déborah Bouhnik; Noémie Resseguier; Christine Lasset; Emmanuelle Mouret-Fourme; Catherine Noguès; Claire Julian-Reynier
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 3.377

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.