Literature DB >> 32945059

Comprehension and personal value of negative non-diagnostic genetic panel testing.

Christin Hoell1, Sharon Aufox1, Nora Nashawaty2, Melanie F Myers3,4, Maureen E Smith1.   

Abstract

Increasing interest and pursuit of genetic testing by the general public have raised concerns about their understanding and use of their results. While most research has focused on individuals receiving positive genetic test results, there have been limited investigations assessing the understanding and utility of receiving negative genetic test results. Individuals who receive a negative (or uninformative) genetic test result may not appreciate the limitations of genetic testing and their residual disease risk. The goals of this study were to explore participant understanding and perceived utility of negative non-diagnostic genetic test results. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants who received negative non-diagnostic genetic test results from the electronic Medical Records and Genomics Network (eMERGE) testing panel at Northwestern University. A total of 17 participants were interviewed. While many expressed a lack of understanding of genetics and the relationship between genes, disease, and environment, most acknowledged that they had residual risk to develop a health problem and should continue with their routine health management. Additionally, participants expressed that their negative results had personal value, by providing them peace of mind and learning additional knowledge about themselves and their health. Participants did not anticipate that results would have an impact on their lifestyle, but felt the results were useful for sharing with their physician and could inform future genetic testing decisions. While mostly positive, some participants were disappointed not to learn more individualized results. While a more thorough exploration is necessary, findings in this study can aid efforts to improve or innovate informed consent for genomic testing, as well as scalable modes of result return that foster comprehension following negative genetic testing.
© 2020 National Society of Genetic Counselors.

Entities:  

Keywords:  genetic testing; health behavior; negative results; perceived utility; population screening; understanding

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32945059      PMCID: PMC8477451          DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1327

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


  34 in total

1.  Application of population screening principles to genetic screening for adult-onset conditions.

Authors:  W Burke; S S Coughlin; N C Lee; D L Weed; M J Khoury
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2001

2.  The general public's understanding and perception of direct-to-consumer genetic test results.

Authors:  J W Leighton; K Valverde; B A Bernhardt
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 2.000

Review 3.  Personal utility in genomic testing: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Jennefer N Kohler; Erin Turbitt; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Actionable, pathogenic incidental findings in 1,000 participants' exomes.

Authors:  Michael O Dorschner; Laura M Amendola; Emily H Turner; Peggy D Robertson; Brian H Shirts; Carlos J Gallego; Robin L Bennett; Kelly L Jones; Mari J Tokita; James T Bennett; Jerry H Kim; Elisabeth A Rosenthal; Daniel S Kim; Holly K Tabor; Michael J Bamshad; Arno G Motulsky; C Ronald Scott; Colin C Pritchard; Tom Walsh; Wylie Burke; Wendy H Raskind; Peter Byers; Fuki M Hisama; Deborah A Nickerson; Gail P Jarvik
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Genomic Essentialism: Its Provenance and Trajectory as an Anticipatory Ethical Concern.

Authors:  Maya Sabatello; Eric Juengst
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 2.683

Review 6.  Public understandings of genetics and health.

Authors:  C M Condit
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 4.438

7.  Patients' understanding of and responses to multiplex genetic susceptibility test results.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Colleen M McBride; Christopher Wade; Sharon Hensley Alford; Robert Reid; Eric Larson; Andreas D Baxevanis; Lawrence C Brody
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Developing patient-friendly genetic and genomic test reports: formats to promote patient engagement and understanding.

Authors:  Susanne B Haga; Rachel Mills; Kathryn I Pollak; Catherine Rehder; Adam H Buchanan; Isaac M Lipkus; Jennifer H Crow; Michael Datto
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 11.117

9.  Predispositional genome sequencing in healthy adults: design, participant characteristics, and early outcomes of the PeopleSeq Consortium.

Authors:  Emilie S Zoltick; Michael D Linderman; Molly A McGinniss; Erica Ramos; Madeleine P Ball; George M Church; Debra G B Leonard; Stacey Pereira; Amy L McGuire; C Thomas Caskey; Saskia C Sanderson; Eric E Schadt; Daiva E Nielsen; Scott D Crawford; Robert C Green
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2019-02-27       Impact factor: 11.117

10.  Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization.

Authors:  Benjamin Saunders; Julius Sim; Tom Kingstone; Shula Baker; Jackie Waterfield; Bernadette Bartlam; Heather Burroughs; Clare Jinks
Journal:  Qual Quant       Date:  2017-09-14
View more
  2 in total

1.  Comprehension of skin cancer genetic risk feedback in primary care patients.

Authors:  Erva Khan; Kimberly A Kaphingst; Kirsten Meyer White; Andrew Sussman; Dolores Guest; Elizabeth Schofield; Yvonne T Dailey; Erika Robers; Matthew R Schwartz; Yuelin Li; David Buller; Keith Hunley; Marianne Berwick; Jennifer L Hay
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2021-11-19

2.  Characteristics and experiences of patients from a community-based and consumer-directed hereditary cancer population screening initiative.

Authors:  Veronica Greve; Katherine Odom; Susanna Pudner; Neil E Lamb; Sara J Cooper; Kelly East
Journal:  HGG Adv       Date:  2021-08-24
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.