Literature DB >> 32024983

Clinical genomic testing: what matters to key stakeholders?

Stephanie Best1,2, Zornitza Stark3,4,5, Peta Phillips3, You Wu6, Janet C Long7, Natalie Taylor8,9, Jeffrey Braithwaite7, John Christodoulou5,10, Ilias Goranitis3,6.   

Abstract

Beyond a narrow focus on cost and outcomes, robust evidence of what is valued in genomic medicine is scarce. We gathered views on value from key stakeholders (clinical genomic staff, operational genomic staff and community representatives) in relation to three testing contexts (General Healthcare, Acute Care and Neurodevelopmental Conditions). We conducted an iterative focus group in three stages over a week using a multiphase mixed methods study, i.e. quantitative ratings and qualitative discussion. For each testing context, the characteristics of genomic testing were generated and ranked by the group using a co-productive approach. Up to 17 characteristics were identified in one scenario with several characteristics featuring in all three testing contexts. The likelihood of getting an answer was consistently reported as most highly valued, followed by the potential for the test to impact on clinical management (or wellbeing/health for Neurodevelopmental Conditions). Risk of discrimination did not feature highly across the different settings (and not at all in Acute Care). While cost was an issue in the general health setting, it was one of the least-valued characteristics in the other two testing contexts. In conclusion, co-producing an understanding of what is valued in different testing contexts, and identifying the areas of differences or commonalities, is important to maximise value provision and inform future policy to ensure that clinical genomic services meet the needs of the community and service providers.

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32024983      PMCID: PMC7316813          DOI: 10.1038/s41431-020-0576-1

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


  2 in total

1.  The Patient's Voice: Australian Health Care Quality and Safety Regulation from the Perspective of the Public.

Authors:  David J Carter; James Brown; Carla Saunders
Journal:  J Law Med       Date:  2018-02

2.  Which attributes of whole genome sequencing tests are most important to the general population? Results from a German preference study.

Authors:  Marika Plöthner; Katharina Schmidt; Clarissa Schips; Kathrin Damm
Journal:  Pharmgenomics Pers Med       Date:  2018-02-14
  2 in total
  4 in total

1.  Patient and Clinician Preferences for Genetic and Genomic Testing in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Simon Fifer; Robyn Ordman; Lisa Briggs; Andrea Cowley
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2022-05-26

2.  Preferences and values for rapid genomic testing in critically ill infants and children: a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Ilias Goranitis; Stephanie Best; John Christodoulou; Tiffany Boughtwood; Zornitza Stark
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-04-02       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  A dynamic systems view of clinical genomics: a rich picture of the landscape in Australia using a complexity science lens.

Authors:  Janet C Long; Hossai Gul; Elise McPherson; Stephanie Best; Hanna Augustsson; Kate Churruca; Louise A Ellis; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 3.063

4.  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

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.