Literature DB >> 28295040

Personal utility in genomic testing: a systematic literature review.

Jennefer N Kohler1, Erin Turbitt1, Barbara B Biesecker1.   

Abstract

Researchers and clinicians refer to outcomes of genomic testing that extend beyond clinical utility as 'personal utility'. No systematic delineation of personal utility exists, making it challenging to appreciate its scope. Identifying empirical elements of personal utility reported in the literature offers an inventory that can be subsequently ranked for its relative value by those who have undergone genomic testing. A systematic review was conducted of the peer-reviewed literature reporting non-health-related outcomes of genomic testing from 1 January 2003 to 5 August 2016. Inclusion criteria specified English language, date of publication, and presence of empirical evidence. Identified outcomes were iteratively coded into unique domains. The search returned 551 abstracts from which 31 studies met the inclusion criteria. Study populations and type of genomic testing varied. Coding resulted in 15 distinct elements of personal utility, organized into three domains related to personal outcomes: affective, cognitive, and behavioral; and one domain related to social outcomes. The domains of personal utility may inform pre-test counseling by helping patients anticipate potential value of test results beyond clinical utility. Identified elements may also inform investigations into the prevalence and importance of personal utility to future test users.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28295040      PMCID: PMC5477355          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2017.10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  58 in total

1.  Points to consider in assessing and appraising predictive genetic tests.

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski; Scott D Grosse; Jürgen John; Helena Kääriäinen; Alastair Kent; Ulf Kristofferson; Jörg Schmidtke
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2010-10-16

2.  Personal factors associated with reported benefits of Huntington disease family history or genetic testing.

Authors:  Janet K Williams; Cheryl Erwin; Andrew Juhl; James Mills; Bradley Brossman; Jane S Paulsen
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2010-08-19

Review 3.  Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods.

Authors:  Mary Dixon-Woods; Shona Agarwal; David Jones; Bridget Young; Alex Sutton
Journal:  J Health Serv Res Policy       Date:  2005-01

Review 4.  Economic methods for valuing the outcomes of genetic testing: beyond cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse; Sarah Wordsworth; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Genetic testing in ectodermal dysplasia: availability, clinical utility, and the nuts and bolts of ordering a genetic test.

Authors:  Sherri J Bale; Allison G Mitchell
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.802

6.  What's at stake? Genetic information from the perspective of people with epilepsy and their family members.

Authors:  Sara Shostak; Dana Zarhin; Ruth Ottman
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2011-07-23       Impact factor: 4.634

7.  Parents' perceptions of the usefulness of chromosomal microarray analysis for children with autism spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Marian Reiff; Ellen Giarelli; Barbara A Bernhardt; Ebony Easley; Nancy B Spinner; Pamela L Sankar; Surabhi Mulchandani
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2015-10

8.  Attitudes of non-African American focus group participants toward return of results from exome and whole genome sequencing.

Authors:  Joon-Ho Yu; Julia Crouch; Seema M Jamal; Michael J Bamshad; Holly K Tabor
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 2.802

9.  The Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale: a new patient-reported outcome measure for clinical genetics services.

Authors:  M McAllister; A M Wood; G Dunn; S Shiloh; C Todd
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 4.438

10.  Balancing Benefits and Risks of Immortal Data: Participants' Views of Open Consent in the Personal Genome Project.

Authors:  Oscar A Zarate; Julia Green Brody; Phil Brown; Mónica D Ramirez-Andreotta; Laura Perovich; Jacob Matz
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2015-12-17       Impact factor: 2.683

View more
  38 in total

1.  "If He Has it, We Know What to Do": Parent Perspectives on Familial Risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Authors:  Katherine E MacDuffie; Lauren Turner-Brown; Annette M Estes; Benjamin S Wilfond; Stephen R Dager; Juhi Pandey; Lonnie Zwaigenbaum; Kelly N Botteron; John R Pruett; Joseph Piven; Holly L Peay
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2020-03-01

2.  Return of individual results in epilepsy genomic research: A view from the field.

Authors:  Ruth Ottman; Catharine Freyer; Heather C Mefford; Annapurna Poduri; Daniel H Lowenstein
Journal:  Epilepsia       Date:  2018-08-10       Impact factor: 5.864

3.  Defining personal utility in genomics: A Delphi study.

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

Review 4.  International Society of Psychiatric Genetics Ethics Committee: Issues facing us.

Authors:  Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz; Maya Sabatello; Laura Huckins; Holly Peay; Franziska Degenhardt; Bettina Meiser; Todd Lencz; Takahiro Soda; Anna Docherty; David Crepaz-Keay; Jehannine Austin; Roseann E Peterson; Lea K Davis
Journal:  Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet       Date:  2019-05-23       Impact factor: 3.568

5.  Intentions to share exome sequencing results with family members: exploring spousal beliefs and attitudes.

Authors:  Erin Turbitt; Megan C Roberts; Rebecca A Ferrer; Jennifer M Taber; Katie L Lewis; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker; William Mp Klein
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  The Genomics ADvISER: development and usability testing of a decision aid for the selection of incidental sequencing results.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Marc Clausen; Chloe Mighton; Lindsay Carlsson; Selina Casalino; Emily Glogowski; Kasmintan Schrader; Michael Evans; Adena Scheer; Nancy Baxter; Jada G Hamilton; Jordan Lerner-Ellis; Kenneth Offit; Mark Robson; Andreas Laupacis
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Psychiatric genetics researchers' views on offering return of results to individual participants.

Authors:  Kristin M Kostick; Cody Brannan; Stacey Pereira; Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz
Journal:  Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 3.568

8.  Patient experience and utility of genetic information: a cross-sectional study among patients tested for cancer susceptibility and thrombophilia.

Authors:  Elvira D'Andrea; Tyra Lagerberg; Corrado De Vito; Erica Pitini; Carolina Marzuillo; Azzurra Massimi; Maria Rosaria Vacchio; Paola Grammatico; Paolo Villari
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Knowing, relationships and trust-citizens' perceptions of whole genome sequencing for the Genetics Clinic of the Future.

Authors:  Simone Schumann; Brigitte Gschmeidler; Giuseppe Pellegrini
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2020-09-30

Review 10.  Genetic Counseling and the Central Tenets of Practice.

Authors:  Barbara Biesecker
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 6.915

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.