Daly Brianne M, Kaphingst Kimberly A
Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Circle of Hope Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
Department of Communication, University of Utah, 255 S. Central Campus Drive, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
PEC Innov. 2023 Mar 8;2:100147. doi: 10.1016/j.pecinn.2023.100147. eCollection 2023 Dec.
To examine definitions and measures for genetic literacy in the published literature, and the associations between commonly utilized measures.
We completed a systematic review searching eight databases for empirical articles containing quantitative measures of genetic literacy. Articles were assessed for study properties, definitions, and measure characteristics. An online survey was then completed by 531 U.S. adults to examine correlations between frequently used genetic literacy measures.
92 articles met inclusion criteria for the systematic review. Articles rarely defined genetic literacy, and existing definitions showed inconsistencies in the knowledge and cognitive domains that comprise genetic literacy. Definitions frequently included objective conceptual knowledge, comprehension, and applied knowledge, however most measures only assessed objective or subjective knowledge. Genetic literacy measures were infrequently assessed for psychometric properties and the content domains assessed by measures varied considerably. Correlation analyses showed weak to moderate relationships between genetic literacy measures.
A comprehensive and consistent definition of genetic literacy and its cognitive and conceptual domains should be implemented to inform the development of concordant measurement tools and improve research and clinical care in genetics.
We examine and compare definitions and measures of genetic literacy, suggest a more comprehensive definition, and recommendations for research development.
研究已发表文献中遗传素养的定义和测量方法，以及常用测量方法之间的关联。
我们进行了一项系统综述，在八个数据库中搜索包含遗传素养定量测量的实证文章。对文章的研究属性、定义和测量特征进行评估。随后，531名美国成年人完成了一项在线调查，以检验常用遗传素养测量方法之间的相关性。
92篇文章符合系统综述的纳入标准。文章很少对遗传素养进行定义，现有的定义在构成遗传素养的知识和认知领域存在不一致之处。定义通常包括客观概念知识、理解和应用知识，然而大多数测量方法仅评估客观或主观知识。很少对遗传素养测量方法的心理测量属性进行评估，且测量方法所评估的内容领域差异很大。相关性分析表明，遗传素养测量方法之间的关系为弱到中度。
应实施遗传素养及其认知和概念领域的全面且一致的定义，以为协调一致的测量工具的开发提供信息，并改善遗传学研究和临床护理。
我们研究并比较了遗传素养的定义和测量方法，提出了更全面的定义以及对研究发展的建议。
