7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The who, what and why of research participants’ intentions to request a broad range of secondary findings in a diagnostic genomic sequencing study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          In a diagnostic exome sequencing study (NCGENES), we investigated adult patients’ intentions to request six categories of secondary findings (SFs) with low or no medical actionability and correlates of their intentions.

          Methods

          At enrollment, eligible participants ( n=152) completed measures assessing their sociodemographic, clinical, and literacy-related characteristics. Prior to and during an in-person diagnostic result disclosure visit, they received education about categories of SFs they could request. Immediately after receiving education at the visit, participants completed measures of intention to learn SFs, interest in each category, and anticipated regret for learning and not learning each category.

          Results

          78% of participants intended to learn at least some SFs. Logistic regressions examined their intention to learn any or all of these findings (vs. none) and interest in each of the six individual categories (yes/no). Results revealed little association between intentions and sociodemographic, clinical, or literacy-related factors. Across outcomes, participants who anticipated regret for learning SFs reported weaker intention to learn them (Odds ratios [OR] from .47–.71), and participants who anticipated regret for not learning these findings reported stronger intention to learn them (ORs 1.61–2.22).

          Conclusion

          Intentions to request SFs with low or no medical actionability may be strongly influenced by participants’ desire to avoid regret.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Rapid assessment of literacy levels of adult primary care patients.

            Health education materials, medical instructions, consent forms, and self-report questionnaires are often given to patients with little regard for their ability to read them. Reading ability is rarely tested in medical settings. The Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM) was developed as a quick screening tool to assist physicians in identifying patients with limited reading skills and in estimating patient reading levels. This information can be used to tailor materials and instructions to patients' abilities. The REALM and the reading sections of the Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised and the Slosson Oral Reading Test were used to test reading ability in 207 adults in six public and private primary care clinics. REALM scores correlated highly with those of the standardized reading tests. The REALM, which takes three to five minutes to administer and score, appears to be a practical instrument to estimate patient literacy in primary care, patient education, and medical research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The agony of ambivalence and ways to resolve it: introducing the MAID model.

              People are generally averse toward conflict between beliefs and/or feelings underlying their attitudes-that is, attitudinal ambivalence. This review integrates literature on attitudinal ambivalence with theories on decision making and coping strategies to gain a better understanding of when and how people deal with feelings of ambivalence. First it shows that ambivalence is experienced as being particularly unpleasant when the ambivalent attitude holder is confronted with the necessity to make a choice concerning the ambivalent attitude object; then, incongruent evaluative components of the attitude become accessible, and feelings of uncertainty about the potential outcomes arise, which may involve the anticipation of aversive emotions. Several coping strategies are employed when ambivalence is experienced as unpleasant. Emotion- and problem-focused coping strategies are discussed. The article concludes with a discussion of the MAID (model of ambivalence-induced discomfort), which aims to describe the consequences of ambivalence.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                9815831
                22061
                Genet Med
                Genet. Med.
                Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics
                1098-3600
                1530-0366
                19 September 2017
                26 October 2017
                29 April 2018
                : 10.1038/gim.2017.176
                Affiliations
                [1 ]John Theuer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ
                [2 ]Econometrica, Inc., Bethesda, MD
                [3 ]Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Durham, NC
                [4 ]Center for Genomics and Society, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
                [5 ]Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC
                [6 ]Department of Genetics, University of North Carollina at Chapel Hill, NC
                [7 ]Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
                [8 ]Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, NC
                [9 ]Department of Health Behavior, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC
                Author notes
                Correspondence regarding this manuscript should be directed to Christine Rini, PhD, John Theurer Cancer Center, Hackensack University Medical Center, Jurist Research Building, Room 302, 30 Prospect Avenue, Hackensack, NJ 07601. christine.rini@ 123456hackensackmeridian.org . Phone: (991) 556-4152
                Article
                NIHMS906345
                10.1038/gim.2017.176
                5920790
                29261173
                57fb5c3a-7a7e-46fb-9357-5ed34ba3819c

                Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Genetics
                diagnostic genomic sequencing,incidental findings,anticipated regret,behavioral intentions

                Comments

                Comment on this article