Literature DB >> 31749259

Demographic differences in the utilization of clinical and direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Nikki M Carroll1, Erica Blum-Barnett1, Sarah D Madrid1, Cabell Jonas2, Kristen Janes3, Monica Alvarado4, Ruth Bedoy1, Valerie Paolino1, Nazneen Aziz5, Elizabeth A McGlynn6, Andrea N Burnett-Hartman1.   

Abstract

Genetic testing has increased over the last decade due to growth in the number of clinical and direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests. However, there is uncertainty about how increased DTC genetic testing affects disparities. Between November 2017 and February 2018, a nationwide electronic survey on experiences with genetic testing was conducted among adult Kaiser Permanente members. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals comparing receipt of clinical and DTC genetic testing between groups by race and ethnicity. Invitations were sent to 57,331 members, and 10,369 surveys were completed. 22% of respondents had received genetic testing (17% DTC and 5% provider-ordered). Non-Hispanic Whites were more likely than other groups to have clinical genetic testing but were similar to Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks in rates of DTC genetic testing. Among those who received any health-related genetic test, 10% reported abnormal results. Of these, non-Hispanic Whites were more likely than other racial/ethnic groups to speak to a medical professional about abnormal results. Results suggest that racial/ethnic disparities in the use of clinical genetic services persist. Additional research is needed to identify lessons learned from DTC genetic testing that may increase equity in the use of clinical genetic services.
© 2019 National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Keywords:  communication; direct-to-consumer genetic testing; disparities; genetic counseling; genetic testing

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31749259     DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1193

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  7 in total

1.  Effect of Superstitious Beliefs and Risk Intuitions on Genetic Test Decisions.

Authors:  Kristen E Riley; Andrew L Sussman; Elizabeth Schofield; Dolores D Guest; Yvonne T Dailey; Matthew R Schwartz; David B Buller; Keith Hunley; Kimberly A Kaphingst; Marianne Berwick; Jennifer L Hay
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  Testing and extending strategies for identifying genetic disease-related encounters in pediatric patients.

Authors:  Lisa P Spees; Karen Hicklin; Michael C Adams; Laura Farnan; Jeannette T Bensen; Donna B Gilleskie; Jonathan S Berg; Bradford C Powell; Kristen Hassmiller Lich
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 8.864

3.  Using Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Results to Accelerate Alzheimer Disease Clinical Trial Recruitment.

Authors:  Mary M Ryan; Chelsea G Cox; Megan Witbracht; Dan Hoang; Daniel L Gillen; Joshua D Grill
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  2021 Apr-Jun 01       Impact factor: 2.703

4.  Ethical concerns relating to genetic risk scores for suicide.

Authors:  Anna Docherty; Brent Kious; Teneille Brown; Leslie Francis; Louisa Stark; Brooks Keeshin; Jeffrey Botkin; Emily DiBlasi; Doug Gray; Hilary Coon
Journal:  Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 3.568

5.  Behavioral and Psychological Outcomes Associated with Skin Cancer Genetic Testing in Albuquerque Primary Care.

Authors:  Jennifer L Hay; Kimberly A Kaphingst; David Buller; Elizabeth Schofield; Kirsten Meyer White; Andrew Sussman; Dolores Guest; Yvonne T Dailey; Erika Robers; Matthew R Schwartz; Yuelin Li; Keith Hunley; Marianne Berwick
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 6.639

6.  Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: Prospective users' attitudes toward information about ancestry and biological relationships.

Authors:  James W Hazel; Catherine Hammack-Aviran; Kathleen M Brelsford; Bradley A Malin; Laura M Beskow; Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Demographic and socioeconomic trends in DNA banking utilization in the USA.

Authors:  Joshua Prudent; Esthermarie Lopez; Donna Dorshorst; Hannah C Cox; Joann N Bodurtha
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-06-29
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.