Literature DB >> 22037899

Information related to prenatal genetic counseling: interpretation by adolescents, effects on risk perception and ethical implications.

Philippe A Melas1, Susanne Georgsson Öhman, Niklas Juth, The-Hung Bui.   

Abstract

Being raised in the genomic era may not only increase knowledge of available genetic testing but may also have an impact on how genetic information is perceived. However, little is known about how current adolescents react to the language commonly used by health care professionals providing prenatal counseling. In addition, as risk communication is related to numbers and figures, having different educational backgrounds may be associated with variability in risk perceptions. In order to investigate these issues, a previously developed questionnaire studying different ways of being told about hypothetical anomalies in a baby and corresponding risks (Abramsky and Fletcher Prenatal Diagnosis 22(13):1188-1194, 2002) was administered to high-school students in Sweden. A total of 344 questionnaires were completed by students belonging to a natural science or a social science program. The data show that teenage participants found technical jargon and words such as rare and abnormal more worrying than the presented comparison terms. Negative framing effects and perception differences related to numeric risk formats were also present. Additionally, participants' gender and educational program did not seem to have an effect on risk assessment. In addition to reporting the questionnaire results, we discuss the ethical implications of the data based on the norm of non-directiveness and make some recommendations for practice. In general, genetic counselors should be aware that the language used within clinical services can be influential on this group of upcoming counselees.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22037899     DOI: 10.1007/s10897-011-9418-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  25 in total

1.  The role of non-directiveness in genetic counseling.

Authors:  Fuat S Oduncu
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2002

2.  The language of uncertainty in genetic risk communication: framing and verbal versus numerical information.

Authors:  M Welkenhuysen; G Evers-Kiebooms; G d'Ydewalle
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2001-05

3.  "SLANG"--Sensitive Language and the New Genetics--an exploratory study.

Authors:  J Hodgson; E Hughes; C Lambert
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  A new definition of Genetic Counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors' Task Force report.

Authors:  Robert Resta; Barbara Bowles Biesecker; Robin L Bennett; Sandra Blum; Susan Estabrooks Hahn; Michelle N Strecker; Janet L Williams
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Is non-directive genetic counselling possible?

Authors:  A Clarke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1991-10-19       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 6.  How risk is perceived, constructed and interpreted by clients in clinical genetics, and the effects on decision making: systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie Sivell; Glyn Elwyn; Clara L Gaff; Angus J Clarke; Rachel Iredale; Chris Shaw; Joanna Dundon; Hazel Thornton; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-10-30       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 7.  Probability information in risk communication: a review of the research literature.

Authors:  Vivianne H M Visschers; Ree M Meertens; Wim W F Passchier; Nanne N K de Vries
Journal:  Risk Anal       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 4.000

8.  The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Elizabeth Dormandy; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2002-09

9.  Perception of risk in relation to ultrasound screening for Down's syndrome during pregnancy.

Authors:  Susanne Georgsson Ohman; Charlotta Grunewald; Ulla Waldenström
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2007-10-24       Impact factor: 2.372

10.  Taking antenatal group B Streptococcus seriously: women's experiences of screening and perceptions of risk.

Authors:  Philip Darbyshire; Carmel Collins; Helen M McDonald; Janet E Hiller
Journal:  Birth       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 3.689

View more
  4 in total

1.  Ethical challenges in teaching genetics for medical students.

Authors:  Erika Nagle; Dzintra Kažoka
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2014-12-15

2.  Knowledge and Attitudes Regarding Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) and Preferences for Risk Information among High School Students in Sweden.

Authors:  Susanne Georgsson; Ellika Sahlin; Moa Iwarsson; Magnus Nordenskjöld; Peter Gustavsson; Erik Iwarsson
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  What's in a Name? Parents' and Healthcare Professionals' Preferred Terminology for Pathogenic Variants in Childhood Cancer Predisposition Genes.

Authors:  Jacqueline D Hunter; Eden G Robertson; Kate Hetherington; David S Ziegler; Glenn M Marshall; Judy Kirk; Jonathan M Marron; Avram E Denburg; Kristine Barlow-Stewart; Meera Warby; Katherine M Tucker; Brittany M Lee; Tracey A O'Brien; Claire E Wakefield
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-08-18

4.  Consanguineous marriages in the genetic counseling centers of Isfahan and the ethical issues of clinical consultations.

Authors:  Narges Nouri; Nayereh Nouri; Samane Tirgar; Elham Soleimani; Vida Yazdani; Farzaneh Zahedi; Bagher Larijani
Journal:  J Med Ethics Hist Med       Date:  2017-12-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.