Literature DB >> 24292896

Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Rachel Mills1, William Barry, Susanne B Haga.   

Abstract

Patient trust in personal medical information is critical to increasing adherence to physician recommendations and medications. One of the anticipated benefits of learning of one's genomic risk for common diseases is the increased adoption of screening, preventive care and lifestyle changes. However, the equivocal results thus far reported of the positive impact of knowledge of genomic risk on behavior change may be due to lack of patients' trust in the results. As part of a clinical study to compare two methods of communication of genomic risk results for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we assessed patients' trust and preferred methods of delivery of genomic risk information. A total of 300 participants recruited from the general public in Durham, NC were randomized to receive their genomic risk for T2DM in-person from a genetic counselor or online through the testing company's web-site. Participants completed a baseline survey and three follow-up surveys after receiving results. Overall, participants reported high levels of trust in the test results. Participants who received their results in-person from the genetic counselor were significantly more likely to trust their results than those who reviewed their results on-line (p = 0.005). There was not a statistically significant difference in levels of trust among participants with increased genetic risk, as compared to other those with decreased or same as population risk (p = 0.1154). In the event they undergo genomic risk testing again, 55 % of participants overall indicated they would prefer to receive their results online compared to 28 % that would prefer to receive future results in-person. Of those participants preferring to receive results online, 77 % indicated they would prefer to have the option to speak to someone if they had questions with the online results (compared to accessing results online without the option of professional consultation). This is the first study to assess satisfaction with genomic risk testing by the method of delivery of the test result. The higher rate of trust in results delivered in-person suggests that online access reports may not result in serious consideration of results and lack of adoption of recommended preventive recommendations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24292896      PMCID: PMC4028379          DOI: 10.1007/s10897-013-9674-3

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


  69 in total

1.  The association between race and attitudes about predictive genetic testing.

Authors:  Nikki Peters; Abigail Rose; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Trust between patients and health websites: a review of the literature and derived outcomes from empirical studies.

Authors:  Laurian C Vega; Enid Montague; Tom Dehart
Journal:  Health Technol (Berl)       Date:  2011-11-18

3.  The association between knowledge and attitudes about genetic testing for cancer risk in the United States.

Authors:  Abigail Rose; Nikki Peters; Judy A Shea; Katrina Armstrong
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2005-06

4.  Delivery of Internet-based cancer genetic counselling services to patients' homes: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Neal J Meropol; Mary B Daly; Hetal S Vig; Frank J Manion; Sharon L Manne; Carla Mazar; Camara Murphy; Nicholas Solarino; Vadim Zubarev
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2010-11-19       Impact factor: 6.184

Review 5.  The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues.

Authors:  Stuart Hogarth; Gail Javitt; David Melzer
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 8.929

6.  Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the Internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first Health Information National Trends Survey.

Authors:  Bradford W Hesse; David E Nelson; Gary L Kreps; Robert T Croyle; Neeraj K Arora; Barbara K Rimer; Kasisomayajula Viswanath
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2005 Dec 12-26

7.  Racial and ethnic disparities in perceptions of physician style and trust.

Authors:  M P Doescher; B G Saver; P Franks; K Fiscella
Journal:  Arch Fam Med       Date:  2000 Nov-Dec

8.  Underutilization of genetics services for autism: the importance of parental awareness and provider recommendation.

Authors:  Kimberly Vande Wydeven; Andrea Kwan; Antonio Y Hardan; Jonathan A Bernstein
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 2.537

9.  Racial differences in medical mistrust among men diagnosed with prostate cancer.

Authors:  Chanita Hughes Halbert; Benita Weathers; Ernestine Delmoor; Brandon Mahler; James Coyne; Hayley S Thompson; Thomas Ten Have; David Vaughn; S Bruce Malkowicz; David Lee
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Interviews with primary care physicians regarding taking and interpreting the cancer family history.

Authors:  Marie E Wood; Alan Stockdale; Brian S Flynn
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2008-09-01       Impact factor: 2.267

View more
  1 in total

1.  Information-seeking and sharing behavior following genomic testing for diabetes risk.

Authors:  Rachel Mills; Jill Powell; William Barry; Susanne B Haga
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.