Eric Vermeulen1, Lidewij Henneman2, Carla G van El2, Martina C Cornel3. 1. 1 Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2 Department of Psychosocial Research, Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands e.vermeulen@vumc.nl. 2. 1 Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. 1 Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3 Centre for Medical Systems Biology, Leiden, The Netherlands 4 CSG Centre for Society and the Life Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Genetic testing and family history assessment can be used as an aid in the prevention of common chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to determine public attitudes and interests towards offering genetic testing and family history-based risk assessment for common chronic disease prevention. METHODS: Cross-sectional questionnaire survey of a consumer panel representative for the Dutch population. The questionnaire was sent to 1399 panel members, aged ≥ 18 years. RESULTS: The response was 70% (978/1399). About half of the respondents expressed an interest in genetic testing to prevent specific diseases (cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes or dementia), with lower-educated respondents showing more interest than higher-educated respondents. Few respondents (24%) agreed that people should be preventively tested for all kinds of diseases. According to the respondents, genetic testing should be performed in the hospital (66%) and be directed to curable (57%) or preventable diseases (69%). Half of the respondents believed that family history assessment could help prevent disease, but only 21% thought it should be offered to everyone, as this could cause people to be worried. A minority (12%) reported that their family history had been assessed, whereas 59% did not have it assessed and did not think this would be necessary. Respondents have differentiated interests in preventive genomics, which varies depending on sex, age and level of education. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the public are interested in genetic testing for preventable and curable diseases, but they are ambivalent about family history risk assessment to prevent disease.
BACKGROUND: Genetic testing and family history assessment can be used as an aid in the prevention of common chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to determine public attitudes and interests towards offering genetic testing and family history-based risk assessment for common chronic disease prevention. METHODS: Cross-sectional questionnaire survey of a consumer panel representative for the Dutch population. The questionnaire was sent to 1399 panel members, aged ≥ 18 years. RESULTS: The response was 70% (978/1399). About half of the respondents expressed an interest in genetic testing to prevent specific diseases (cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes or dementia), with lower-educated respondents showing more interest than higher-educated respondents. Few respondents (24%) agreed that people should be preventively tested for all kinds of diseases. According to the respondents, genetic testing should be performed in the hospital (66%) and be directed to curable (57%) or preventable diseases (69%). Half of the respondents believed that family history assessment could help prevent disease, but only 21% thought it should be offered to everyone, as this could cause people to be worried. A minority (12%) reported that their family history had been assessed, whereas 59% did not have it assessed and did not think this would be necessary. Respondents have differentiated interests in preventive genomics, which varies depending on sex, age and level of education. CONCLUSIONS: Members of the public are interested in genetic testing for preventable and curable diseases, but they are ambivalent about family history risk assessment to prevent disease.
Authors: Veda N Giri; Elias Obeid; Sarah E Hegarty; Laura Gross; Lisa Bealin; Colette Hyatt; Carolyn Y Fang; Amy Leader Journal: Prostate Date: 2018-04-14 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: Kelly F J Stewart; Daša Kokole; Anke Wesselius; Annemie M W J Schols; Maurice P Zeegers; Hein de Vries; Liesbeth A D M van Osch Journal: Public Health Genomics Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Daniel S Dodson; Aaron J Goldenberg; Matthew M Davis; Dianne C Singer; Beth A Tarini Journal: Public Health Genomics Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Deborah A Marshall; Karen V MacDonald; Jill Oliver Robinson; Lisa F Barcellos; Milena Gianfrancesco; Monica Helm; Amy McGuire; Robert C Green; Michael P Douglas; Michael A Goldman; Kathryn A Phillips Journal: Per Med Date: 2017-05-23 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Allecia E Reid; Jennifer M Taber; Rebecca A Ferrer; Barbara B Biesecker; Katie L Lewis; Leslie G Biesecker; William M P Klein Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2018-05-10 Impact factor: 4.267