Literature DB >> 9355576

Information recall in genetic counselling: a pilot study of its assessment.

S Michie1, D French, A Allanson, M Bobrow, T M Marteau.   

Abstract

One of the main aims of genetic counselling is to provide information to patients that they can understand and recall. Measuring information recall is problematic and most studies do not make the comparison between recalled information and the information that is given in consultations. The aim of this study was to determine the validity of using genetic counsellors' reports of information given in genetic consultations as the basis for a measure of patient recall. Counsellors in 35 routine genetic counselling consultations were asked to indicate important information given during consultations by highlighting items in their summary letters sent to patients. This was checked by a researcher against tape-recordings of the consultations. One month later, patients were telephoned by the researcher and asked to recall as much information as they could from the consultation and to rate its importance. Over 95% of the information that counsellors identified as important had been given during the consultation. Patients rated this information as important. Although there was an association between the overall number of items that counsellors and patients judged to be important, patients more frequently judged information about family implications to be important than did counsellors. On the other hand, counsellors more frequently judged information about test, diagnosis and prognosis to be important than did patients. These results suggest that counsellors' summary letters are a valid baseline against which to measure patient recall. This measure will not, however, capture all the information that patients consider important.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9355576     DOI: 10.1016/s0738-3991(97)00068-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Patient Educ Couns        ISSN: 0738-3991


  13 in total

1.  Recommendation recall and satisfaction after attending breast/ovarian cancer risk counseling.

Authors:  Sharon L Bober; Lizbeth A Hoke; Rosemary B Duda; Nadine M Tung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-08-04       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Assessment of psychosocial outcomes in genetic counseling research: an overview of available measurement scales.

Authors:  Nadine A Kasparian; Claire E Wakefield; Bettina Meiser
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-08-13       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 3.  Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine.

Authors:  Denise M Lautenbach; Kurt D Christensen; Jeffrey A Sparks; Robert C Green
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 8.929

Review 4.  Assessment of the content and process of genetic counseling: a critical review of empirical studies.

Authors:  Bettina Meiser; Jennifer Irle; Elizabeth Lobb; Kristine Barlow-Stewart
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  A Method for Analyzing Videotaped Genetic Counseling Sessions.

Authors:  A Liede; L Kerzin-Storrar; D Craufurd
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  The Unmet Information and Support Needs of Women with a Family History of Breast Cancer: A Descriptive Survey.

Authors:  Belinda Thewes; Bettina Meiser; Monica Tucker; Kathy Tucker
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  A Qualitative Study to Explore the Views and Attitudes towards Prenatal Testing in Adults Who Have Muenke Syndrome and their Partners.

Authors:  Julie Phipps; Heather Skirton
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Family Conferences in the Neonatal ICU: Observation of Communication Dynamics and Contributions.

Authors:  Renee D Boss; Pamela K Donohue; Susan M Larson; Robert M Arnold; Debra L Roter
Journal:  Pediatr Crit Care Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.624

9.  'Balance' is in the eye of the beholder: providing information to support informed choices in antenatal screening via Antenatal Screening Web Resource.

Authors:  Shenaz Ahmed; Louise Bryant; Jenny Hewison
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  The potential of a placebo/nocebo effect in pharmacogenetics.

Authors:  S B Haga; L R Warner; J O'Daniel
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 2.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.