Literature DB >> 33649540

Direct to consumer genetic testing in Denmark-public knowledge, use, and attitudes.

Anne-Marie Gerdes1, Line Nicolaisen2, Egil Husum3, Janne Bayer Andersen2, Martin Dræbye Gantzhorn3, Laura Roos2, Birgitte Rode Diness2.   

Abstract

Direct to consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is offered by commercial companies, but the use in the general population has only been sparsely investigated. A questionnaire was sent to 2013 representative Danish citizens asking about their awareness and use of DTC-GT. Individuals who had undergone a genetic test were interviewed to determine if the results had been understood correctly. A pilot study with 2469 questionnaires was performed before this study. In total, 45.4% of the individuals (n = 913/2013) had knowledge about DTC-GT and 2.5% (n = (18 + 5)/913) previously had a genetic test by a private company and 5.8% through the public health care system (n = (48 + 5)/913). Curiosity about own genetic information was the most frequent motivation (40.9%, n = 9/22) as well as knowledge of ancestry (36.4%, n = 8/22) and advice about lifestyle, exercise, or diet (36.4%, n = 8/22). Test of own disease risk was given as a reason in 27.3% (n = 6/22) and seeking possible explanation of specific symptoms in 13.6% (n = 3/22). 50% (n = 11/22) answered that they had become concerned after the test, and 17.4% (n = 4/23) had consulted their GP. Interviews in a subset of respondents from the pilot study revealed problems with understanding the results. One problem was how to interpret the genetic test results with respect to individual risk for a disease. For example, the difference between disease causing genetic variants in monogenetic diseases versus statistical risks by SNPs in multifactorial diseases was not understood by the respondents.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33649540      PMCID: PMC8110758          DOI: 10.1038/s41431-021-00810-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   5.351


  28 in total

1.  Legislation on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in seven European countries.

Authors:  Pascal Borry; Rachel E van Hellemondt; Dominique Sprumont; Camilla Fittipaldi Duarte Jales; Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag; Tade Matthias Spranger; Liam Curren; Jane Kaye; Herman Nys; Heidi Howard
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  "I would rather have it done by a doctor"-laypeople's perceptions of direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC GT) and its ethical implications.

Authors:  Manuel Schaper; Sabine Wöhlke; Silke Schicktanz
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2019-03

Review 3.  The Impact of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing on Patient and Provider.

Authors:  Mary Beth Palko Dinulos; Stephanie E Vallee
Journal:  Clin Lab Med       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 1.935

4.  Public Perceptions of Recessive Carrier Testing in the Preconception and Prenatal Periods.

Authors:  Jennifer J Shiroff; Lynne S Nemeth
Journal:  J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs       Date:  2015-10-15

5.  Be Ready to Talk With Parents About Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing.

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2020-02-01       Impact factor: 16.193

6.  Statement of the ESHG on direct-to-consumer genetic testing for health-related purposes.

Authors: 
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Interest in expanded carrier screening among individuals and couples in the general population: systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Eva Van Steijvoort; Davit Chokoshvili; Jeffrey W Cannon; Hilde Peeters; Karen Peeraer; Gert Matthijs; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 15.610

8.  Public reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic health tests: A comparison across the US, UK, Japan and Australia.

Authors:  Jan Charbonneau; Dianne Nicol; Don Chalmers; Kazuto Kato; Natsuko Yamamoto; Jarrod Walshe; Christine Critchley
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.351

9.  Swedish parents' interest in preconception genetic carrier screening.

Authors:  Maria Ekstrand Ragnar; Tanja Tydén; Ulrik Kihlbom; Margareta Larsson
Journal:  Ups J Med Sci       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 2.384

Review 10.  Behavioural changes, sharing behaviour and psychological responses after receiving direct-to-consumer genetic test results: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kelly F J Stewart; Anke Wesselius; Maartje A C Schreurs; Annemie M W J Schols; Maurice P Zeegers
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-06-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.