Defining critical educational components of informed consent for genetic testing: views of US-based genetic counselors and medical geneticists

被引:0
|
作者
Miranda L. G. Hallquist
Maia J. Borensztein
Curtis R. Coughlin
Adam H. Buchanan
W. Andrew Faucett
Holly L. Peay
Maureen E. Smith
Eric P. Tricou
Wendy R. Uhlmann
Karen E. Wain
Kelly E. Ormond
机构
[1] Geisinger,Department of Genetics
[2] Stanford University School of Medicine,Department of Pediatrics and Center for Bioethics and Humanities
[3] University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus,Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine
[4] RTI International,Division of Genetic Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine; Department of Human Genetics; Center for Bioethics & Social Sciences in Medicine
[5] Genomics,undefined
[6] Bioinformatics,undefined
[7] and Translational Research Center,undefined
[8] Northwestern University,undefined
[9] University of Michigan,undefined
[10] Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics,undefined
[11] Stanford University School of Medicine,undefined
[12] Health Ethics and Policy Lab,undefined
[13] Department of Health Sciences and Technology,undefined
[14] ETH Zurich,undefined
来源
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Consent and Disclosure Recommendation (CADRe) framework proposes that key components of informed consent for genetic testing can be covered with a targeted discussion for many conditions rather than a time-intensive traditional genetic counseling approach. We surveyed US genetics professionals (medical geneticists and genetic counselors) on their response to scenarios that proposed core informed consent concepts for clinical genetic testing developed in a prior expert consensus process. The anonymous online survey included responses to 3 (of 6 possible) different clinical scenarios that summarized the application of the core concepts. There was a binary (yes/no) question asking respondents whether they agreed the scenarios included the minimum necessary and critical educational concepts to allow an informed decision. Respondents then provided open-ended feedback on what concepts were missing or could be removed. At least one scenario was completed by 238 respondents. For all but one scenario, over 65% of respondents agreed that the identified concepts portrayed were sufficient for an informed decision; the exome scenario had the lowest agreement (58%). Qualitative analysis of the open-ended comments showed no consistently mentioned concepts to add or remove. The level of agreement with the example scenarios suggests that the minimum critical educational components for pre-test informed consent proposed in our prior work is a reasonable starting place for targeted pre-test discussions. This may be helpful in providing consistency to the clinical practice of both genetics and non-genetics providers, meeting patients’ informational needs, tailoring consent for psychosocial support, and in future guideline development.
引用
收藏
页码:1165 / 1174
页数:9
相关论文
共 7 条
  • [1] Defining critical educational components of informed consent for genetic testing: views of US-based genetic counselors and medical geneticists
    Hallquist, Miranda L. G.
    Borensztein, Maia J. J.
    Coughlin, Curtis R. R.
    Buchanan, Adam H. H.
    Faucett, W. Andrew
    Peay, Holly L. L.
    Smith, Maureen E. E.
    Tricou, Eric P. P.
    Uhlmann, Wendy R. R.
    Wain, Karen E. E.
    Ormond, Kelly E. E.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2023, 31 (10) : 1165 - 1174
  • [2] Defining the Critical Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing
    Ormond, Kelly E.
    Borensztein, Maia J.
    Hallquist, Miranda L. G.
    Buchanan, Adam H.
    Faucett, William Andrew
    Peay, Holly L.
    Smith, Maureen E.
    Tricou, Eric P.
    Uhlmann, Wendy R.
    Wain, Karen E.
    Coughlin, Curtis R.
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2021, 11 (12):
  • [3] Critical components of informed consent for genetic testing: Results of a Delphi Consensus process
    Ormond, K. E.
    Borensztein, M.
    Buchanan, A. H.
    Faucett, W.
    Hallquist, M. L. G.
    Peay, H. L.
    Smith, M. E.
    Tricou, E.
    Uhlmann, W. R.
    Wain, K. E.
    Coughlin, C. R., II
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2020, 28 (SUPPL 1) : 50 - 50
  • [4] Socioeconomic Status and Interest in Genetic Testing in a US-Based Sample
    Dusic, E. J.
    Bowen, Deborah J.
    Bennett, Robin
    Cain, Kevin C.
    Theoryn, Tesla
    Velasquez, Mariebeth
    Swisher, Elizabeth
    Brant, Jeannine M.
    Shirts, Brian
    Wang, Catharine
    HEALTHCARE, 2022, 10 (05)
  • [5] PAPER An analysis of US fertility centre educational materials suggests that informed consent for preimplantation genetic diagnosis may be inadequate
    LaBonte, Michelle Lynne
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2012, 38 (08) : 479 - 484
  • [6] NGS-Based genetic testing for heritable cardiovascular diseases. Specific requirements for obtaining informed consent
    Schmidtke, Joerg
    Wittkowski, Kathrin
    Glaubitz, Ralf
    MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR PROBES, 2019, 45 : 70 - 78
  • [7] Critical components of genomic medicine practice for non-genetics healthcare professionals: Genetic counselors' perspectives and implications for medical education
    Coleman, Tanner
    Bensend, Tracy
    Mills, Rachel
    Orlando, Lori A.
    Doyle, Lauren
    JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING, 2023, : 798 - 811