Literature DB >> 22317975

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

Gemma R Brett1, Sylvia A Metcalfe, David J Amor, Jane L Halliday.   

Abstract

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) allows individuals to obtain genetic tests directly from companies without necessarily involving health professionals. This study explores genetic health professionals' opinions of health-related DTC-GT and the reported frequency of individuals presenting to clinical genetics services after undertaking testing. Genetic counsellors and clinical geneticists, members of the Human Genetics Society of Australasia, completed an online survey in mid 2011. The 130 genetic counsellors (estimated response fraction=43%) and 38 clinical geneticists (estimated response fraction=46%) had mixed opinions regarding DTC-GT, with only 7% confident in accurately interpreting and explaining DTC-GT results. Nineteen respondents (11%) reported one or more client(s) referred to them after undertaking DTC-GT. Descriptions of 25 clients were extracted from responses, and respondents reported that all clients were concerned for the health of either themselves or family members. Most clients presented to genetic clinics specifically as a result of their DTC-GT (96%) and were self or GP referred (92%). Respondents perceived that their clients typically undertook DTC-GT because they wanted to identify monogenic conditions, including carrier testing and/or know their susceptibility or predisposition for complex conditions (88%). The majority of clients needed help interpreting DTC-GT results (80%), however in general were not questioning the validity of their DTC-GT results (92%) nor seeking further genetic testing (84%). Currently, DTC-GT is not a major reason for referral to clinical genetics services in Australia and New Zealand and the majority of genetic health professionals lack confidence in being able to accurately interpret and explain DTC-GT results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22317975      PMCID: PMC3400727          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2012.13

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  26 in total

1.  Illusions of scientific legitimacy: misrepresented science in the direct-to-consumer genetic-testing marketplace.

Authors:  Amy B Vashlishan Murray; Michael J Carson; Corey A Morris; Jon Beckwith
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 11.639

2.  Health-care referrals from direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Monica A Giovanni; Matthew R Fickie; Lisa S Lehmann; Robert C Green; Lisa M Meckley; David Veenstra; Michael F Murray
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2010-10-28

3.  Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk.

Authors:  Cinnamon S Bloss; Nicholas J Schork; Eric J Topol
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Direct-to-consumer genomics and research ethics: should a more robust informed consent process be included?

Authors:  Katherine Wasson
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 11.229

5.  Direct-to-consumer genomics, social networking, and confidentiality.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 11.229

6.  Social networkers' attitudes toward direct-to-consumer personal genome testing.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Christina M Diaz; Tao Wang; Susan G Hilsenbeck
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 11.229

7.  Motivations and perceptions of early adopters of personalized genomics: perspectives from research participants.

Authors:  S E Gollust; E S Gordon; C Zayac; G Griffin; M F Christman; R E Pyeritz; L Wawak; B A Bernhardt
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-06-03       Impact factor: 2.000

8.  Public interest in predictive genetic testing, including direct-to-consumer testing, for susceptibility to major depression: preliminary findings.

Authors:  Alex Wilde; Bettina Meiser; Philip B Mitchell; Peter R Schofield
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Health-related direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a review of companies' policies with regard to genetic testing in minors.

Authors:  Pascal Borry; Heidi C Howard; Karine Sénécal; Denise Avard
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2009-06-02       Impact factor: 2.375

10.  Health care provider and consumer awareness, perceptions, and use of direct-to-consumer personal genomic tests, United States, 2008.

Authors:  Katherine Kolor; Tiebin Liu; Jeanette St Pierre; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  21 in total

1.  To ban or not to ban? Clinical geneticists' views on the regulation of direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Heidi Carmen Howard; Pascal Borry
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 8.807

Review 2.  The perspective from EASAC and FEAM on direct-to-consumer genetic testing for health-related purposes.

Authors:  Robin Fears; Volker ter Meulen
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-11-21       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Direct-to-consumer genomic testing from the perspective of the health professional: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Lesley Goldsmith; Leigh Jackson; Anita O'Connor; Heather Skirton
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-01-16

4.  Atti Le giornate della ricerca scientificae delle esperienze professionali dei giovani: Società Italiana di Igiene, Medicina Preventiva e Sanità Pubblica (SItI) Roma 20-21 dicembre 2019.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Prev Med Hyg       Date:  2020-02-13

5.  Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing and Personal Genomics Services: A Review of Recent Empirical Studies.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; Jenny Ostergren
Journal:  Curr Genet Med Rep       Date:  2013-09

6.  "Bridge to the Literature"? Third-Party Genetic Interpretation Tools and the Views of Tool Developers.

Authors:  Sarah C Nelson; Stephanie M Fullerton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Primary care patients' views and decisions about, experience of and reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Katherine Wasson; Tonya Nashay Sanders; Nancy S Hogan; Sara Cherny; Kathy J Helzlsouer
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-07-07

8.  Retail genetics.

Authors:  Ken Harvey; Basia Diug
Journal:  Aust Prescr       Date:  2017-06-01

9.  Public reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic health tests: A comparison across the US, UK, Japan and Australia.

Authors:  Jan Charbonneau; Dianne Nicol; Don Chalmers; Kazuto Kato; Natsuko Yamamoto; Jarrod Walshe; Christine Critchley
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.351

Review 10.  Personalized medicine and atrial fibrillation: will it ever happen?

Authors:  Steven A Lubitz; Patrick T Ellinor
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2012-12-04       Impact factor: 8.775

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.