Literature DB >> 25307491

Patient reported outcomes and patient empowerment in clinical genetics services.

M McAllister1, A Dearing1.   

Abstract

Evaluation of clinical genetics services (CGS), including genetic counseling and genetic testing, has been problematic. Patient mortality and morbidity are unlikely to be directly improved by interventions offered in CGS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are not routinely measured in CGS evaluation, but this may change as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) become a key part of how healthcare services are managed and funded across the world. However, there is no clear consensus about which PROMs are most useful for CGS evaluation. This review summarizes the published research on how PROs from CGS have been measured and how patients may benefit from using those services, with a focus on patient empowerment. Many patient benefits (PROs) identified repeatedly in the research literature can be re-interpreted within a patient empowerment framework. Other important PROs identified include family functioning, social functioning, altruism, sense of purpose, enabling development of future research and treatment/participating in research. Well-validated measures are available to capture (dimensions of) patient empowerment. Although generic measures of family functioning are available, suitable measures capturing social functioning, development of future treatments, and altruism were not identified in this review. Patient empowerment provides one useful approach to measuring PROs from CGS.
© 2014 The Authors. Clinical Genetics published by John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical genetics services; genetic counseling; patient benefits; patient empowerment; patient-reported outcome measures; patient-reported outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25307491     DOI: 10.1111/cge.12520

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


  22 in total

Review 1.  Human genotype-phenotype databases: aims, challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Anthony J Brookes; Peter N Robinson
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2015-11-10       Impact factor: 53.242

2.  Translation and Adaptation of the Genetic Counselling Outcome Scale (GCOS-24) for Use in Denmark.

Authors:  Birgitte Rode Diness; Gritt Overbeck; Tina Duelund Hjortshøj; Trine Bjørg Hammer; Susanne Timshel; Else Sørensen; Marion McAllister
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-03-06       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  The need to develop an evidence base for genetic counselling in Europe.

Authors:  Marion McAllister; Ramona Moldovan; Milena Paneque; Heather Skirton
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 4.  A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling.

Authors:  Lisa Madlensky; Angela M Trepanier; Deborah Cragun; Barbara Lerner; Kristen M Shannon; Heather Zierhut
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 5.  Personal utility in genomic testing: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Jennefer N Kohler; Erin Turbitt; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  The genome empowerment scale: An assessment of parental empowerment in families with undiagnosed disease.

Authors:  Allyn McConkie-Rosell; Kelly Schoch; Jennifer Sullivan; Heidi Cope; Rebecca Spillmann; Christina G S Palmer; Loren Pena; Yong-Hui Jiang; Nicole Daniels; Nicole Walley; Khoon G Tan; Stephen R Hooper; Vandana Shashi
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2019-10-08       Impact factor: 4.438

7.  Translation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation with Preliminary Validation of GCOS-24 for Use in Spain.

Authors:  Patricia Muñoz-Cabello; Sixto García-Miñaúr; Manuel Eliecer Espinel-Vallejo; Lorenzo Fernández-Franco; Alexandra Stephens; Fernando Santos-Simarro; Pablo Lapunzina-Badía; Marion McAllister
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Patient empowerment in Europe: is no further research needed?

Authors:  Livio Garattini; Anna Padula
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2018-06

Review 9.  How should costs and cost-effectiveness be considered in prenatal genetic testing?

Authors:  Teresa N Sparks; Aaron B Caughey
Journal:  Semin Perinatol       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 3.300

10.  Development and Pilot Testing of a Decision Aid for Genomic Research Participants Notified of Clinically Actionable Research Findings for Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Amanda M Willis; Sian K Smith; Bettina Meiser; Mandy L Ballinger; David M Thomas; Martin Tattersall; Mary-Anne Young
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-02-17       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.