Literature DB >> 29250907

Patient perspectives on the use of categories of conditions for decision making about genomic carrier screening results.

Stephanie A Kraft1,2, Carmit K McMullen3, Kathryn M Porter1, Tia L Kauffman3, James V Davis3, Jennifer L Schneider3, Katrina A B Goddard3, Benjamin S Wilfond1,2.   

Abstract

As expanded genome-scale carrier screening becomes increasingly prevalent, patients will face decisions about whether to receive results about a vast number of genetic conditions. Understanding patient preferences is important to meaningfully demonstrate the ethical goal of respect and support patient autonomy. We explore one possible way to elicit preferences by sorting conditions into categories, which may support patient decision making, but the extent to which categories are helpful is unknown. In the context of a randomized trial of genome sequencing for preconception carrier screening compared to usual care (single disease carrier testing), we interviewed 41 participants who had genome sequencing about their experience using a taxonomy of conditions to select categories of results to receive. We then conducted interviews with an additional 10 participants who were not randomized to genome sequencing, asking them about the taxonomy, their reasons for selecting categories, and alternative ways of presenting information about potential results to receive. Participants in both groups found the categories helpful and valued having a meaningful opportunity to choose which results to receive, regardless of whether they opted to receive all or only certain categories of results. Additionally, participants who received usual care highlighted preparedness as a primary motivation for receiving results, and they indicated that being presented with possible reasons for receiving or declining results for each category could be helpful. Our findings can be used to develop approaches, including the use of categories, to support patient choices in expanded carrier screening. Further research should evaluate and optimize these approaches.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  carrier testing; genetic condition taxonomy; genome sequencing; patient perceptions

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29250907     DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.38583

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med Genet A        ISSN: 1552-4825            Impact factor:   2.802


  7 in total

1.  Expanded genetic carrier screening in clinical practice: a current survey of patient impressions and attitudes.

Authors:  Nigel Pereira; Michelle Wood; Emerly Luong; Allison Briggs; Michael Galloway; Rose A Maxwell; Steven R Lindheim
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-02-13       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Expanded carrier screening: counseling and considerations.

Authors:  Teresa N Sparks
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-11-02       Impact factor: 4.132

3.  Preconception expanded carrier screening: a focus group study with relatives of mucopolysaccharidosis type III patients and the general population.

Authors:  Thirsa Conijn; Ivy van Dijke; Lotte Haverman; Phillis Lakeman; Frits A Wijburg; Lidewij Henneman
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-03-22

Review 4.  Incorporating patient perspectives in the development of a core outcome set for reproductive genetic carrier screening: a sequential systematic review.

Authors:  Ebony Richardson; Alison McEwen; Toby Newton-John; Ashley Crook; Chris Jacobs
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 5.351

5.  Evaluation and classification of severity for 176 genes on an expanded carrier screening panel.

Authors:  Aishwarya Arjunan; Holly Bellerose; Raul Torres; Rotem Ben-Shachar; Jodi D Hoffman; Brad Angle; Robert Nathan Slotnick; Brittany N Simpson; Andrea M Lewis; Pilar L Magoulas; Kelly Bontempo; Jeanine Schulze; Jennifer Tarpinian; Jessica A Bucher; Richard Dineen; Allison Goetsch; Gabriel A Lazarin; Katherine Johansen Taber
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2020-06-16       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  Demonstrating 'respect for persons' in clinical research: findings from qualitative interviews with diverse genomics research participants.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Erin Rothwell; Seema K Shah; Devan M Duenas; Hannah Lewis; Kristin Muessig; Douglas J Opel; Katrina A B Goddard; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 7.  The evolving landscape of expanded carrier screening: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Stephanie A Kraft; Devan Duenas; Benjamin S Wilfond; Katrina A B Goddard
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-09-24       Impact factor: 8.822

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.