Literature DB >> 29261173

The who, what, and why of research participants' intentions to request a broad range of secondary findings in a diagnostic genomic sequencing study.

Christine Rini1, Cynthia M Khan2, Elizabeth Moore3, Myra I Roche4,5,6, James P Evans4,6,7, Jonathan S Berg4,6, Bradford C Powell6, Giselle Corbie-Smith7,8,9, Ann Katherine M Foreman4,6, Ida Griesemer10, Kristy Lee6, Julianne M O'Daniel4,6, Gail E Henderson4,8.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In a diagnostic exome sequencing study (the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-Generation Exome Sequencing project, NCGENES), we investigated adult patients' intentions to request six categories of secondary findings (SFs) with low or no medical actionability and correlates of their intentions.
METHODS: At enrollment, eligible participants (n = 152) completed measures assessing their sociodemographic, clinical, and literacy-related characteristics. Prior to and during an in-person diagnostic result disclosure visit, they received education about categories of SFs they could request. Immediately after receiving education at the visit, participants completed measures of intention to learn SFs, interest in each category, and anticipated regret for learning and not learning each category.
RESULTS: Seventy-eight percent of participants intended to learn at least some SFs. Logistic regressions examined their intention to learn any or all of these findings (versus none) and interest in each of the six individual categories (yes/no). Results revealed little association between intentions and sociodemographic, clinical, or literacy-related factors. Across outcomes, participants who anticipated regret for learning SFs reported weaker intention to learn them (odds ratios (ORs) from 0.47 to 0.71), and participants who anticipated regret for not learning these findings reported stronger intention to learn them (OR 1.61-2.22).
CONCLUSION: Intentions to request SFs with low or no medical actionability may be strongly influenced by participants' desire to avoid regret.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29261173      PMCID: PMC5920790          DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  3 in total

1.  The NCGENES project: exploring the new world of genome sequencing.

Authors:  Ann Katherine M Foreman; Kristy Lee; James P Evans
Journal:  N C Med J       Date:  2013 Nov-Dec

2.  Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients.

Authors:  T C Davis; M A Crouch; S W Long; R H Jackson; P Bates; R B George; L E Bairnsfather
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  1991-08       Impact factor: 1.756

3.  Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: a shortened screening instrument.

Authors:  T C Davis; S W Long; R H Jackson; E J Mayeaux; R B George; P W Murphy; M A Crouch
Journal:  Fam Med       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 1.756

  3 in total
  8 in total

1.  The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium: Integrating Genomic Sequencing in Diverse and Medically Underserved Populations.

Authors:  Laura M Amendola; Jonathan S Berg; Carol R Horowitz; Frank Angelo; Jeannette T Bensen; Barbara B Biesecker; Leslie G Biesecker; Gregory M Cooper; Kelly East; Kelly Filipski; Stephanie M Fullerton; Bruce D Gelb; Katrina A B Goddard; Benyam Hailu; Ragan Hart; Kristen Hassmiller-Lich; Galen Joseph; Eimear E Kenny; Barbara A Koenig; Sara Knight; Pui-Yan Kwok; Katie L Lewis; Amy L McGuire; Mary E Norton; Jeffrey Ou; Donald W Parsons; Bradford C Powell; Neil Risch; Mimsie Robinson; Christine Rini; Sarah Scollon; Anne M Slavotinek; David L Veenstra; Melissa P Wasserstein; Benjamin S Wilfond; Lucia A Hindorff; Sharon E Plon; Gail P Jarvik
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Psychological adaptation to diagnostic genomic sequencing results: The role of hope fulfillment.

Authors:  Ida Griesemer; Elizabeth Moore; Cynthia Khan; Myra Roche; Gail Henderson; Christine Rini
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2019-04-08       Impact factor: 4.267

3.  Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Mwenza Blell; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Lorraine Cowley; Stephanie O M Dyke; Clara Gaff; Robert Green; Alison Hall; Amber L Johns; Bartha M Knoppers; Stephanie Mulrine; Christine Patch; Eva Winkler; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Perspectives and preferences regarding genomic secondary findings in underrepresented prenatal and pediatric populations: A mixed-methods approach.

Authors:  Shannon Rego; Hannah Hoban; Simon Outram; Astrid N Zamora; Flavia Chen; Nuriye Sahin-Hodoglugil; Beatriz Anguiano; Matthew Norstad; Tiffany Yip; Billie Lianoglou; Teresa N Sparks; Mary E Norton; Barbara A Koenig; Anne M Slavotinek; Sara L Ackerman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2022-04-08       Impact factor: 8.864

5.  Psychological outcomes related to exome and genome sequencing result disclosure: a meta-analysis of seven Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium studies.

Authors:  Jill O Robinson; Julia Wynn; Barbara Biesecker; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara Bernhardt; Kyle B Brothers; Wendy K Chung; Kurt D Christensen; Robert C Green; Amy L McGuire; M Ragan Hart; Ida Griesemer; Donald L Patrick; Christine Rini; David Veenstra; Angel M Cronin; Stacy W Gray
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2019-06-13       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 6.  Views on genomic research result delivery methods and informed consent: a review.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 2.512

7.  Evaluating the clinical utility of early exome sequencing in diverse pediatric outpatient populations in the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation of Next-generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) 2 study: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Jonathan S Berg; Jeannette T Bensen; Brooke S Staley; Laura V Milko; Margaret Waltz; Ida Griesemer; Lonna Mollison; Tracey L Grant; Laura Farnan; Myra Roche; Angelo Navas; Alexandra Lightfoot; Ann Katherine M Foreman; Julianne M O'Daniel; Suzanne C O'Neill; Feng-Chang Lin; Tamara S Roman; Alicia Brandt; Bradford C Powell; Christine Rini
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-06-14       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  A qualitative study among patients with an inherited retinal disease on the meaning of genomic unsolicited findings.

Authors:  Ignaas Devisch; Elfride De Baere; Marlies Saelaert; Heidi Mertes; Tania Moerenhout; Caroline Van Cauwenbergh; Bart P Leroy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.