Literature DB >> 28068660

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: User Motivations, Decision Making, and Perceived Utility of Results.

J Scott Roberts1, Michele C Gornick, Deanna Alexis Carere, Wendy R Uhlmann, Mack T Ruffin, Robert C Green.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To describe the interests, decision making, and responses of consumers of direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing (DTC-PGT) services.
METHODS: Prior to 2013 regulatory restrictions on DTC-PGT services, 1,648 consumers from 2 leading companies completed Web surveys before and after receiving test results.
RESULTS: Prior to testing, DTC-PGT consumers were as interested in ancestry (74% very interested) and trait information (72%) as they were in disease risks (72%). Among disease risks, heart disease (68% very interested), breast cancer (67%), and Alzheimer disease (66%) were of greatest interest prior to testing. Interest in disease risks was associated with female gender and poorer self-reported health (p < 0.01). Many consumers (38%) did not consider the possibility of unwanted information before purchasing services; this group was more likely to be older, male, and less educated (p < 0.05). After receiving results, 59% of respondents said test information would influence management of their health; 2% reported regret about seeking testing and 1% reported harm from results.
CONCLUSION: DTC-PGT has attracted controversy because of the health-related information it provides, but nonmedical information is of equal or greater interest to consumers. Although many consumers did not fully consider potential risks prior to testing, DTC-PGT was generally perceived as useful in informing future health decisions.
© 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Direct-to-consumer genomic testing; Genetic testing; Health policy; Personal genomics; Test utility

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28068660     DOI: 10.1159/000455006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  48 in total

Review 1.  First Responder to Genomic Information: A Guide for Primary Care Providers.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 4.074

2.  Consumer Perspectives on Access to Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Role of Demographic Factors and the Testing Experience.

Authors:  Sarah E Gollust; Stacy W Gray; Deanna Alexis Carere; Barbara A Koenig; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Amy L McGUIRE; Richard R Sharp; Kayte Spector-Bagdady; N A Wang; Robert C Green; J Scott Roberts
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.911

3.  Clinical implications of APOE genotyping for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (LOAD) risk estimation: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Victoria S Marshe; Ilona Gorbovskaya; Sarah Kanji; Maxine Kish; Daniel J Müller
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 3.575

4.  Factors Associated with Acceptability, Consideration and Intention of Uptake of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Survey Study.

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

5.  Integrating Genomics into Healthcare: A Global Responsibility.

Authors:  Zornitza Stark; Lena Dolman; Teri A Manolio; Brad Ozenberger; Sue L Hill; Mark J Caulfied; Yves Levy; David Glazer; Julia Wilson; Mark Lawler; Tiffany Boughtwood; Jeffrey Braithwaite; Peter Goodhand; Ewan Birney; Kathryn N North
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-01-03       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  Sequencing Newborns: A Call for Nuanced Use of Genomic Technologies.

Authors:  Josephine Johnston; John D Lantos; Aaron Goldenberg; Flavia Chen; Erik Parens; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.683

7.  Impacts of personal DNA ancestry testing.

Authors:  Caryn Kseniya Rubanovich; Riley Taitingfong; Cynthia Triplett; Ondrej Libiger; Nicholas J Schork; Jennifer K Wagner; Cinnamon S Bloss
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2020-08-13

8.  The clinical imperative for inclusivity: Race, ethnicity, and ancestry (REA) in genomics.

Authors:  Alice B Popejoy; Deborah I Ritter; Kristy Crooks; Erin Currey; Stephanie M Fullerton; Lucia A Hindorff; Barbara Koenig; Erin M Ramos; Elena P Sorokin; Hannah Wand; Mathew W Wright; James Zou; Christopher R Gignoux; Vence L Bonham; Sharon E Plon; Carlos D Bustamante
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.878

9.  The Implementation Chasm Hindering Genome-informed Health Care.

Authors:  Kevin B Johnson; Ellen Wright Clayton; Justin Starren; Josh Peterson
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.718

10.  Consumer (dis-)interest in Genetic Ancestry Testing: The roles of race, immigration, and ancestral certainty.

Authors:  Adam L Horowitz; Aliya Saperstein; Jasmine Little; Martin Maiers; Jill A Hollenbach
Journal:  New Genet Soc       Date:  2019-01-20
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.