Philip J Lupo1, Jill O Robinson2, Pamela M Diamond3, Leila Jamal2, Heather E Danysh1, Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby2, Lisa Soleymani Lehmann4, Jason L Vassy5, Kurt D Christensen6, Robert C Green6, Amy L McGuire2. 1. Department of Pediatrics, Section of Hematology-Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 2. Center for Medical Ethics & Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 3. Division of Health Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 4. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Division of General Medicine & Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 20115, USA. 5. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Division of General Medicine & Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 20115, USA; Section of General Internal Medicine, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, MA 02130, USA. 6. Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA; Division of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate patients' expectations regarding the perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing (WGS). MATERIALS & METHODS: We used latent class analysis to characterize individuals enrolled in the MedSeq Project based on their perceived utility of WGS. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between participant characteristics and latent classes. RESULTS: Findings characterized participants into one of three perceived utility groups: enthusiasts, who had a high probability of agreement with all utility items (23%); health conscious, who perceived utility in medically related areas (60%) or skeptics, who had a low probability of agreement with utility items (17%). Trust significantly predicted latent class. CONCLUSION: Understanding differences in perceived utility of WGS may inform strategies for uptake of this technology.
AIM: To evaluate patients' expectations regarding the perceived utility of whole-genome sequencing (WGS). MATERIALS & METHODS: We used latent class analysis to characterize individuals enrolled in the MedSeq Project based on their perceived utility of WGS. Multinomial logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between participant characteristics and latent classes. RESULTS: Findings characterized participants into one of three perceived utility groups: enthusiasts, who had a high probability of agreement with all utility items (23%); health conscious, who perceived utility in medically related areas (60%) or skeptics, who had a low probability of agreement with utility items (17%). Trust significantly predicted latent class. CONCLUSION: Understanding differences in perceived utility of WGS may inform strategies for uptake of this technology.
Authors: Jason L Vassy; Kurt D Christensen; Melody J Slashinski; Denise M Lautenbach; Sridharan Raghavan; Jill Oliver Robinson; Jennifer Blumenthal-Barby; Lindsay Zausmer Feuerman; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Michael F Murray; Robert C Green; Amy L McGuire Journal: Per Med Date: 2015 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Kimberly A Kaphingst; Colleen M McBride; Christopher Wade; Sharon Hensley Alford; Robert Reid; Eric Larson; Andreas D Baxevanis; Lawrence C Brody Journal: Genet Med Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Alan N Mayer; David P Dimmock; Marjorie J Arca; David P Bick; James W Verbsky; Elizabeth A Worthey; Howard J Jacob; David A Margolis Journal: Genet Med Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: Teri A Manolio; Rex L Chisholm; Brad Ozenberger; Dan M Roden; Marc S Williams; Richard Wilson; David Bick; Erwin P Bottinger; Murray H Brilliant; Charis Eng; Kelly A Frazer; Bruce Korf; David H Ledbetter; James R Lupski; Clay Marsh; David Mrazek; Michael F Murray; Peter H O'Donnell; Daniel J Rader; Mary V Relling; Alan R Shuldiner; David Valle; Richard Weinshilboum; Eric D Green; Geoffrey S Ginsburg Journal: Genet Med Date: 2013-01-10 Impact factor: 8.822
Authors: J N Kohler; E Turbitt; K L Lewis; B S Wilfond; L Jamal; H L Peay; L G Biesecker; B B Biesecker Journal: Clin Genet Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 4.438
Authors: Meghan C Halley; Jennifer L Young; Liliana Fernandez; Jennefer N Kohler; Jonathan A Bernstein; Matthew T Wheeler; Holly K Tabor Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2022-01-03 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Hadley Stevens Smith; Kyle B Brothers; Sara J Knight; Sara L Ackerman; Christine Rini; David L Veenstra; Amy L McGuire; Benjamin S Wilfond; Janet Malek Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2021-10-22 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Hadley Stevens Smith; Stephanie R Morain; Jill Oliver Robinson; Isabel Canfield; Janet Malek; Caryn Kseniya Rubanovich; Cinnamon S Bloss; Sara L Ackerman; Barbara Biesecker; Kyle B Brothers; Crispin N Goytia; Carol R Horowitz; Sara J Knight; Barbara Koenig; Stephanie A Kraft; Simon Outram; Christine Rini; Kelly J Shipman; Margaret Waltz; Benjamin Wilfond; Amy L McGuire Journal: Patient Date: 2021-10-18 Impact factor: 3.481
Authors: Robert C Green; Katrina A B Goddard; Gail P Jarvik; Laura M Amendola; Paul S Appelbaum; Jonathan S Berg; Barbara A Bernhardt; Leslie G Biesecker; Sawona Biswas; Carrie L Blout; Kevin M Bowling; Kyle B Brothers; Wylie Burke; Charlisse F Caga-Anan; Arul M Chinnaiyan; Wendy K Chung; Ellen W Clayton; Gregory M Cooper; Kelly East; James P Evans; Stephanie M Fullerton; Levi A Garraway; Jeremy R Garrett; Stacy W Gray; Gail E Henderson; Lucia A Hindorff; Ingrid A Holm; Michelle Huckaby Lewis; Carolyn M Hutter; Pasi A Janne; Steven Joffe; David Kaufman; Bartha M Knoppers; Barbara A Koenig; Ian D Krantz; Teri A Manolio; Laurence McCullough; Jean McEwen; Amy McGuire; Donna Muzny; Richard M Myers; Deborah A Nickerson; Jeffrey Ou; Donald W Parsons; Gloria M Petersen; Sharon E Plon; Heidi L Rehm; J Scott Roberts; Dan Robinson; Joseph S Salama; Sarah Scollon; Richard R Sharp; Brian Shirts; Nancy B Spinner; Holly K Tabor; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch; David L Veenstra; Nikhil Wagle; Karen Weck; Benjamin S Wilfond; Kirk Wilhelmsen; Susan M Wolf; Julia Wynn; Joon-Ho Yu Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Elizabeth V Clarke; Jennifer L Schneider; Frances Lynch; Tia L Kauffman; Michael C Leo; Ana G Rosales; John F Dickerson; Elizabeth Shuster; Benjamin S Wilfond; Katrina A B Goddard Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-07-18 Impact factor: 3.240