Literature DB >> 31186522

Responsibility, culpability, and parental views on genomic testing for seriously ill children.

Janet Malek1, Stacey Pereira2, Jill O Robinson2, Amanda M Gutierrez2, Melody J Slashinski3, D Williams Parsons4,5, Sharon E Plon4,5, Amy L McGuire2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We describe parental perceptions of and experiences with genomic sequencing (GS) in the care of seriously ill children. Understanding parents' perspectives is vital for clinicians caring for children, given the uptake of genomic technologies into clinical practice.
METHODS: Longitudinal, semistructured interviews were conducted with parents of pediatric cancer patients who underwent exome sequencing (ES) as a part of the BASIC3 study. Interviews were conducted at baseline, one to eight months after results disclosure, and approximately one year after disclosure. Using thematic qualitative analysis, parent interviews were coded with both inductive and deductive approaches.
RESULTS: Before receiving genomic information, parents indicated that they saw ES as something responsible parents would agree to if their child had cancer. Some parents talked about the possibility of sequencing affecting feelings of culpability for their child's cancer, worrying that they passed on a cancer-causing gene or made parenting decisions that caused the disease. However, after receiving their child's ES results many reported feeling relieved of guilt and worry, and felt they had fulfilled parental duties by agreeing to ES for their child.
CONCLUSION: These results reveal a layer of meaning that parents associate with GS that may inform clinicians' approach to care.

Entities:  

Keywords:  blame; genomic sequencing; guilt; parent perspectives; responsibility

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31186522      PMCID: PMC9089459          DOI: 10.1038/s41436-019-0570-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.864


  18 in total

1.  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

2.  The Actionability of Exome sequencing testing results.

Authors:  Tanya Stivers; Stefan Timmermans
Journal:  Sociol Health Illn       Date:  2017-11

3.  Parents perspectives on whole genome sequencing for their children: qualified enthusiasm?

Authors:  J A Anderson; M S Meyn; C Shuman; R Zlotnik Shaul; L E Mantella; M J Szego; S Bowdin; N Monfared; R Z Hayeems
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2016-11-25       Impact factor: 2.903

4.  Parent perspectives on pediatric genetic research and implications for genotype-driven research recruitment.

Authors:  Holly K Tabor; Tracy Brazg; Julia Crouch; Emily E Namey; Stephanie M Fullerton; Laura M Beskow; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.742

5.  Key Implications of Data Sharing in Pediatric Genomics.

Authors:  Vasiliki Rahimzadeh; Christoph Schickhardt; Bartha M Knoppers; Karine Sénécal; Danya F Vears; Conrad V Fernandez; Stefan Pfister; Sharon Plon; Sharon Terry; Janet Williams; Marc S Williams; Martina Cornel; Jan M Friedman
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2018-05-01       Impact factor: 16.193

6.  Descriptive survey about causes of illness given by the parents of children with cancer.

Authors:  Bernardi Matteo; Badon Pierluigi
Journal:  Eur J Oncol Nurs       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 2.398

7.  Genetic testing and counseling in the case of an autism diagnosis: A caregivers perspective.

Authors:  Kristien Hens; Hilde Peeters; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 2.708

8.  Parental attitudes, values, and beliefs toward the return of results from exome sequencing in children.

Authors:  J C Sapp; D Dong; C Stark; L E Ivey; G Hooker; L G Biesecker; B B Biesecker
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 4.438

9.  Is Whole-Exome Sequencing an Ethically Disruptive Technology? Perspectives of Pediatric Oncologists and Parents of Pediatric Patients With Solid Tumors.

Authors:  Laurence B McCullough; Melody J Slashinski; Amy L McGuire; Richard L Street; Christine M Eng; Richard A Gibbs; D William Parsons; Sharon E Plon
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2015-10-27       Impact factor: 3.167

10.  Understanding the Psychosocial Effects of WES Test Results on Parents of Children with Rare Diseases.

Authors:  Lotte Krabbenborg; L E L M Vissers; J Schieving; T Kleefstra; E J Kamsteeg; J A Veltman; M A Willemsen; S Van der Burg
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-04-20       Impact factor: 2.537

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Conceptualization of utility in translational clinical genomics research.

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

2.  A Prospective Study of Parental Perceptions of Rapid Whole-Genome and -Exome Sequencing among Seriously Ill Infants.

Authors:  Julie A Cakici; David P Dimmock; Sara A Caylor; Mary Gaughran; Christina Clarke; Cynthia Triplett; Michelle M Clark; Stephen F Kingsmore; Cinnamon S Bloss
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2020-11-05       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Exome and genome sequencing for pediatric patients with congenital anomalies or intellectual disability: an evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

Authors:  Kandamurugu Manickam; Monica R McClain; Laurie A Demmer; Sawona Biswas; Hutton M Kearney; Jennifer Malinowski; Lauren J Massingham; Danny Miller; Timothy W Yu; Fuki M Hisama
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  Hope versus reality: Parent expectations of genomic testing.

Authors:  Katherine E Donohue; Siobhan M Dolan; Dana Watnick; Katie M Gallagher; Jacqueline A Odgis; Sabrina A Suckiel; Nehama Teitelman; Bruce D Gelb; Eimear E Kenny; Melissa P Wasserstein; Carol R Horowitz; Laurie J Bauman
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2021-01-29

5.  Examining access to care in clinical genomic research and medicine: Experiences from the CSER Consortium.

Authors:  Amanda M Gutierrez; Jill O Robinson; Simon M Outram; Hadley S Smith; Stephanie A Kraft; Katherine E Donohue; Barbara B Biesecker; Kyle B Brothers; Flavia Chen; Benyam Hailu; Lucia A Hindorff; Hannah Hoban; Rebecca L Hsu; Sara J Knight; Barbara A Koenig; Katie L Lewis; Kristen Hassmiller Lich; Julianne M O'Daniel; Sonia Okuyama; Gail E Tomlinson; Margaret Waltz; Benjamin S Wilfond; Sara L Ackerman; Mary A Majumder
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2021-09-14

6.  Parental Hopes and Understandings of the Value of Prenatal Diagnostic Genomic Sequencing: A Qualitative Analysis.

Authors:  Simon M Outram; Julia E H Brown; Astrid N Zamora; Nuriye Sahin-Hodoglugil; Sara L Ackerman
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 4.772

Review 7.  Utility of Genetic Testing from the Perspective of Parents/Caregivers: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Robin Z Hayeems; Stephanie Luca; Daniel Assamad; Ayushi Bhatt; Wendy J Ungar
Journal:  Children (Basel)       Date:  2021-03-27

8.  Toward the diagnosis of rare childhood genetic diseases: what do parents value most?

Authors:  Samantha Pollard; Deirdre Weymann; Jessica Dunne; Fatemeh Mayanloo; John Buckell; James Buchanan; Sarah Wordsworth; Jan M Friedman; Sylvia Stockler-Ipsiroglu; Nick Dragojlovic; Alison M Elliott; Mark Harrison; Larry D Lynd; Dean A Regier
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-04-26       Impact factor: 4.246

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.