Literature DB >> 22372614

Direct to consumer genetic testing: a systematic review of position statements, policies and recommendations.

H Skirton1, L Goldsmith, L Jackson, A O'Connor.   

Abstract

In healthcare settings, genetic tests to determine whether an individual had inherited a genetic mutation are ordered by a health professional, and the results are interpreted and conveyed to the patient by that person. However, direct to consumer genetic testing (DTCGT) has enabled individuals to purchase genetic tests and receive results without the intervention of a health professional. To inform a set of guidelines for consumers and health professionals, we undertook a systematic review of position statements, policies and recommendations on the use of DTCGT. We performed a search of seven databases and the Internet for relevant documents. The search terms were 'direct to consumer' and 'genetic test', and documents in English published from 2002 to 2011 were included. The search retrieved 314 items, of which 14 were eligible for review. Five themes were derived from thematic analysis: motivation for use, potential benefits, potential harms, recommendations to guide consumers and need for research. The authors of these documents described more potential harms than benefits, but, although some stated that direct to consumer testing should be actively discouraged, others supported consumer rights to make autonomous choices. Further research into the impact of direct to consumer testing on health services and consumers is required to inform policies.
© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22372614     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2012.01863.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Genet        ISSN: 0009-9163            Impact factor:   4.438


  29 in total

1.  Use of big data in drug development for precision medicine.

Authors:  Rosa S Kim; Nicolas Goossens; Yujin Hoshida
Journal:  Expert Rev Precis Med Drug Dev       Date:  2016-04-28

2.  Fair allocation of health-care resources: finding a model that does not disenfranchise users of genetic services. A commentary on Rogowski et al....

Authors:  Heather Skirton
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Awareness, attitudes and perspectives of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in Greece: a survey of potential consumers.

Authors:  Vasiliki Mavroidopoulou; Ellie Xera; Vasiliki Mollaki
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.172

4.  Attitudes about regulation among direct-to-consumer genetic testing customers.

Authors:  Juli Murphy Bollinger; Robert C Green; David Kaufman
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2013-04-06

Review 5.  Next generation sequencing and the future of genetic diagnosis.

Authors:  Katja Lohmann; Christine Klein
Journal:  Neurotherapeutics       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 7.620

6.  Predictors of adverse psychological experiences surrounding genome-wide profiling for disease risk.

Authors:  K M Broady; K E Ormond; E J Topol; N J Schork; Cinnamon S Bloss
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-11-13

Review 7.  Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; John W Belmont; Jonathan S Berg; Benjamin E Berkman; Yvonne Bombard; Ingrid A Holm; Howard P Levy; Kelly E Ormond; Howard M Saal; Nancy B Spinner; Benjamin S Wilfond; Joseph D McInerney
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Preconception counseling: do patients learn about genetics from their obstetrician gynecologists?

Authors:  Adrienne H Mandelberger; Jared C Robins; John E Buster; William C Strohsnitter; Beth J Plante
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  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

10.  Harm, hype and evidence: ELSI research and policy guidance.

Authors:  Timothy Caulfield; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Yann Joly; Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 11.117

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.