Literature DB >> 33860464

A content analysis of direct-to-consumer DNA testing on TikTok.

Corey H Basch1, Joseph Fera2, Nasia Quinones3.   

Abstract

Despite the fact that the internet is a popular source of health information, limited research has been conducted on the ways in which direct-to-consumer (DTC) DNA testing has been discussed by consumers on the internet, and on social media platforms specifically. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of 100 videos that addressed DTC DNA testing on TikTok, a video-sharing social network. The 100 videos included had a combined 77,498 comments and 9,680,309 likes.The majority (> 50%) of videos reviewed mentioned using DTC DNA testing kits to find family roots (94%), included information on commercial DNA testing kits (67%), and featured a person taking or talking about taking a DNA test (92%). These videos also received a majority of the total comments/likes. Neither the use of music (p = .06 and p = .07) nor the mention of using DNA testing to locate family (p = .08 and p = .09) had a significant effect on a video's comments or likes, respectively. Genetic counselors, health care providers, and public health professionals should be aware that there is a need to present both benefits and disadvantages of DTC DNA testing on social media platforms. A greater presence of comprehensive information on social media platforms can increase the likelihood that one makes erudite decisions.

Keywords:  Direct-to-consumer genetic testing; Social media; TikTok

Year:  2021        PMID: 33860464     DOI: 10.1007/s12687-021-00526-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Community Genet        ISSN: 1868-310X


  11 in total

1.  The medical examination in United States immigration applications: the potential use of genetic testing leads to heightened privacy concerns.

Authors:  A Maxwell Burroughs
Journal:  J Biolaw Bus       Date:  2005

2.  Currents in contemporary ethics. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: is it the practice of medicine?

Authors:  Cynthia Marietta; Amy L McGuire
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.718

3.  Genealogy databases and the future of criminal investigation.

Authors:  Natalie Ram; Christi J Guerrini; Amy L McGuire
Journal:  Science       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Protecting posted genes: social networking and the limits of GINA.

Authors:  Sandra Soo-Jin Lee; Emily Borgelt
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 11.229

5.  Using genetic genealogy databases in missing persons cases and to develop suspect leads in violent crimes.

Authors:  Debbie Kennett
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 2.395

6.  DNA testing information on YouTube: Inadequate advice can mislead and harm the public.

Authors:  Corey H Basch; Grace C Hillyer; Miryam Z Wahrman; Philip Garcia; Charles E Basch
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2020-12-31       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Direct-to-consumer genomics, social networking, and confidentiality.

Authors:  David B Resnik
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 11.229

8.  DNA-testing for immigration cases: the risk of erroneous conclusions.

Authors:  Andreas O Karlsson; Gunilla Holmlund; Thore Egeland; Petter Mostad
Journal:  Forensic Sci Int       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 2.395

9.  Direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Authors:  Rachel Horton; Gillian Crawford; Lindsey Freeman; Angela Fenwick; Caroline F Wright; Anneke Lucassen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2019-10-16

10.  Promoting Mask Use on TikTok: Descriptive, Cross-sectional Study.

Authors:  Corey H Basch; Joseph Fera; Isabela Pierce; Charles E Basch
Journal:  JMIR Public Health Surveill       Date:  2021-02-12
View more
  1 in total

1.  Direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the news: a descriptive analysis.

Authors:  Corey H Basch; Grace C Hillyer; Lalitha Samuel; Erela Datuowei; Betty Cohn
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2022-10-14
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.