• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

分娩模式对理解2型糖尿病基因组风险的影响。

Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetes.

作者信息

Haga S B, Barry W T, Mills R, Svetkey L, Suchindran S, Willard H F, Ginsburg G S

机构信息

Duke Institute for Genome Sciences and Policy, Duke University, Durham, N.C., USA.

出版信息

Public Health Genomics. 2014;17(2):95-104. doi: 10.1159/000358413. Epub 2014 Feb 27.

DOI:10.1159/000358413
PMID:24577154
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4028057/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Genetic information, typically communicated in-person by genetic counselors, can be challenging to comprehend; delivery of this information online--as is becoming more common--has the potential of increasing these challenges.

METHODS

To address the impact of the mode of delivery of genomic risk information, 300 individuals were recruited from the general public and randomized to receive genomic risk information for type 2 diabetes mellitus in-person from a board-certified genetic counselor or online through the testing company's website.

RESULTS

Participants were asked to indicate their genomic risk and overall lifetime risk as reported on their test report as well as to interpret their genomic risk (increased, decreased, or same as population). For each question, 59% of participants correctly indicated their risk. Participants who received their results in-person were more likely than those who reviewed their results on-line to correctly interpret their genomic risk (72 vs. 47%, p = 0.0002) and report their actual genomic risk (69 vs. 49%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The delivery of personal genomic risk through a trained health professional resulted in significantly higher comprehension. Therefore, if the online delivery of genomic test results is to become more widespread, further evaluation of this method of communication may be needed to ensure the effective presentation of results to promote comprehension.

摘要

背景

遗传信息通常由遗传咨询师亲自传达,理解起来可能具有挑战性;而如今越来越普遍的在线传递这种信息,有可能加剧这些挑战。

方法

为了研究基因组风险信息传递方式的影响,从普通公众中招募了300人,并随机分配他们通过获得认证的遗传咨询师亲自获取2型糖尿病的基因组风险信息,或通过检测公司网站在线获取。

结果

要求参与者指出他们检测报告中报告的基因组风险和总体终生风险,并解释他们的基因组风险(增加、降低或与总体人群相同)。对于每个问题,59%的参与者正确指出了他们的风险。亲自收到检测结果的参与者比在线查看结果的参与者更有可能正确解释他们的基因组风险(72%对47%,p = 0.0002),并报告他们实际的基因组风险(69%对49%,p = 0.002)。

结论

通过训练有素的健康专业人员传递个人基因组风险信息,能显著提高理解程度。因此,如果基因组检测结果的在线传递要更广泛地开展,可能需要对这种沟通方式进行进一步评估,以确保有效呈现结果,促进理解。

相似文献

1
Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetes.分娩模式对理解2型糖尿病基因组风险的影响。
Public Health Genomics. 2014;17(2):95-104. doi: 10.1159/000358413. Epub 2014 Feb 27.
2
Information-seeking and sharing behavior following genomic testing for diabetes risk.糖尿病风险基因检测后的信息寻求与分享行为。
J Genet Couns. 2015 Feb;24(1):58-66. doi: 10.1007/s10897-014-9736-1. Epub 2014 Jun 14.
3
Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus.公众对2型糖尿病基因组风险评估的信任度。
J Genet Couns. 2014 Jun;23(3):401-8. doi: 10.1007/s10897-013-9674-3. Epub 2013 Dec 3.
4
How Well Do Customers of Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing Services Comprehend Genetic Test Results? Findings from the Impact of Personal Genomics Study.直接面向消费者的个人基因组检测服务的客户对基因检测结果的理解程度如何?个人基因组学研究影响的结果
Public Health Genomics. 2015;18(4):216-24. doi: 10.1159/000431250. Epub 2015 Jun 16.
5
Impact of genetic risk information and type of disease on perceived risk, anticipated affect, and expected consequences of genetic tests.遗传风险信息和疾病类型对基因检测的感知风险、预期情感及预期后果的影响。
Health Psychol. 2009 May;28(3):307-16. doi: 10.1037/a0013947.
6
Comprehension and Data-Sharing Behavior of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Test Customers.直接面向消费者的基因检测客户的理解能力与数据共享行为。
Public Health Genomics. 2016;19(2):116-24. doi: 10.1159/000444477. Epub 2016 Mar 8.
7
MAGENTA (Making Genetic testing accessible): a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing online genetic education and telephone genetic counseling for hereditary cancer genetic testing.MAGENTA(使基因检测普及化):一项前瞻性随机对照试验,比较在线遗传教育和电话遗传咨询对遗传性癌症基因检测的影响。
BMC Cancer. 2019 Jul 2;19(1):648. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5868-x.
8
Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Genomic Counseling for Patients Receiving Personalized and Actionable Complex Disease Reports.接受个性化且具有可操作性的复杂疾病报告的患者的基因组咨询随机对照试验结果
J Genet Couns. 2017 Oct;26(5):980-998. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0073-z. Epub 2017 Mar 27.
9
Operationalizing the Reciprocal Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice: a Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Genomic Counseling and Testing.实施遗传咨询实践的互惠参与模型:基因组咨询与检测可扩展交付的框架。
J Genet Couns. 2018 Sep;27(5):1111-1129. doi: 10.1007/s10897-018-0230-z. Epub 2018 Feb 19.
10
[China genetic counseling network (CGCN): a website on genetic counseling and genetic education].
Yi Chuan. 2007 Mar;29(3):381-4. doi: 10.1360/yc-007-0381.

引用本文的文献

1
Genetics Navigator: protocol for a mixed methods randomized controlled trial evaluating a digital platform to deliver genomic services in Canadian pediatric and adult populations.遗传导航员:一项混合方法随机对照试验的方案,旨在评估一个数字平台在加拿大儿科和成人人群中提供基因组服务的效果。
BMJ Open. 2024 Sep 3;14(9):e090084. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090084.
2
Advancing the communication of genetic risk for cardiometabolic diseases: a critical interpretive synthesis.推进心血管代谢疾病遗传风险的交流:批判性综合解读。
BMC Med. 2023 Nov 13;21(1):432. doi: 10.1186/s12916-023-03150-9.
3
Barriers and Facilitators for Population Genetic Screening in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review.健康人群中群体遗传筛查的障碍与促进因素:一项系统综述
Front Genet. 2022 Jul 4;13:865384. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2022.865384. eCollection 2022.
4
An Intervention Study on Children's Healthy Joint Attention Skills Based on a Mixed Instructional Approach of DTT and PRT.基于 DTT 和 PRT 混合教学法的儿童健康联合注意技能干预研究。
J Healthc Eng. 2022 Mar 18;2022:5987582. doi: 10.1155/2022/5987582. eCollection 2022.
5
Considerations for developing regulations for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a scoping review using the 3-I framework.制定直接面向消费者的基因检测法规的考量:使用3-I框架的范围综述
J Community Genet. 2022 Apr;13(2):155-170. doi: 10.1007/s12687-022-00582-3. Epub 2022 Feb 16.
6
A Web Portal for Communicating Polygenic Risk Score Results for Health Care Use-The P5 Study.用于医疗保健用途的多基因风险评分结果交流网络门户——P5研究
Front Genet. 2021 Oct 29;12:763159. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2021.763159. eCollection 2021.
7
A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact.一项关于社会和行为科学研究的范围综述,旨在将基因组发现转化为对人群健康的影响。
Transl Behav Med. 2021 Apr 26;11(4):901-911. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibaa076.
8
Neutral, Negative, or Negligible? Changes in Patient Perceptions of Disease Risk Following Receipt of a Negative Genomic Screening Result.中性、负面还是可忽略不计?接受阴性基因组筛查结果后患者对疾病风险认知的变化。
J Pers Med. 2020 Apr 17;10(2):24. doi: 10.3390/jpm10020024.
9
Personalized Medicine Implementation with Non-traditional Data Sources: A Conceptual Framework and Survey of the Literature.利用非传统数据源实施个性化医疗:概念框架与文献综述
Yearb Med Inform. 2019 Aug;28(1):181-189. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1677916. Epub 2019 Aug 16.
10
Internet Versus Virtual Reality Settings for Genomics Information Provision.互联网与虚拟现实环境下的基因组学信息提供
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2019 Jan;22(1):7-14. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0453. Epub 2018 Jun 22.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessment of the Effectiveness of Genetic Counseling by Telephone Compared to a Clinic Visit.电话遗传咨询与门诊就诊遗传咨询效果的评估
J Genet Couns. 2003 Apr;12(2):171-84. doi: 10.1023/A:1022663324006.
2
Communicating genetic risk information for common disorders in the era of genomic medicine.在基因组医学时代传播常见疾病的遗传风险信息。
Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2013;14:491-513. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genom-092010-110722.
3
Primary care patients' views and decisions about, experience of and reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a longitudinal study.基层医疗患者对直接面向消费者的基因检测的看法、决策、体验及反应:一项纵向研究
J Community Genet. 2013 Oct;4(4):495-505. doi: 10.1007/s12687-013-0156-y. Epub 2013 Jul 7.
4
The effectiveness of a graphical presentation in addition to a frequency format in the context of familial breast cancer risk communication: a multicenter controlled trial.图形呈现与频率格式在家族性乳腺癌风险沟通中的联合效果:一项多中心对照试验。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 Apr 29;13:55. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-55.
5
Perceptions of genetic counseling services in direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing.直接面向消费者的个人基因组测试中对遗传咨询服务的看法。
Clin Genet. 2013 Oct;84(4):335-9. doi: 10.1111/cge.12166. Epub 2013 May 13.
6
Public knowledge of and attitudes toward genetics and genetic testing.公众对遗传学和基因检测的了解及态度。
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2013 Apr;17(4):327-35. doi: 10.1089/gtmb.2012.0350. Epub 2013 Feb 13.
7
Family history of cancer and its association with breast cancer risk perception and repeat mammography.癌症家族史与乳腺癌风险认知和重复乳房 X 光检查的关联
Am J Public Health. 2012 Dec;102(12):2322-9. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2012.300786. Epub 2012 Oct 18.
8
Comparison of family history and SNPs for predicting risk of complex disease.比较家族史和 SNPs 预测复杂疾病的风险。
PLoS Genet. 2012;8(10):e1002973. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1002973. Epub 2012 Oct 11.
9
The right tool is what they need, not what we have: a taxonomy of appropriate levels of precision in patient risk communication.他们需要的是合适的工具,而不是我们拥有的工具:一种用于患者风险沟通的适当精度水平的分类法。
Med Care Res Rev. 2013 Feb;70(1 Suppl):37S-49S. doi: 10.1177/1077558712458541. Epub 2012 Sep 6.
10
Testing different communication formats on responses to imagined risk of having versus missing the GSTM1 gene.测试不同的沟通格式对想象的 GSTM1 基因缺失与存在风险的反应。
J Health Commun. 2013;18(1):124-37. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2012.688245. Epub 2012 Aug 13.