Biobank Research

  • Legislation
  • Case Law
  • Resources
  • International
  • About the project
Menu

Return of incidental findings in genomic medicine: measuring what patients value[mdash]development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generation testing (IMPRINT)

- Genet Med
Author/s: -Bennette, Caroline Savage -Trinidad, Susan Brown -Fullerton, Stephanie M. -Patrick, Donald -Amendola, Laura -Burke, Wylie -Hisama, Fuki M. -Jarvik, Gail P. -Regier, Dean A. -Veenstra, David L.
Journal: Genet Med
Year: 2013
Volume: 15
Issue: 11
Pages: 873-881
Abstract:

Purpose:

Little is known about the factors that influence patients’ preferences for the return of incidental findings from genome sequencing. This study identified attributes of incidental findings that were important to patients and developed a discrete-choice experiment instrument to quantify patient preferences.
Methods:

An initial set of key attributes and attribute levels was developed from a literature review and in consultation with experts. The attributes’ salience and communication were refined using focus group methodology (n = 12) and cognitive interviews (n = 6) with patients who had received conventional genetic testing for familial colorectal cancer or polyposis syndromes. The attributes and levels used in the hypothetical choices presented to participants were identified using validated experimental design techniques.
Results:

The final discrete-choice experiment instrument incorporates the following attributes and levels: lifetime risk of disease (5, 40, 70%); disease treatability (medical, lifestyle, none); disease severity (mild, moderate, severe); carrier status (yes, no); drug response likelihood (high, moderate, none); and test cost ($250, $425, $1,000, $1,900).
Conclusion:

Patient preferences for incidental genomic findings are likely influenced by a complex set of diverse attributes. Quantification of patient preferences can inform patient–provider communication by highlighting the attributes of incidental findings that matter most to patients and warrant further discussion.

Genet Med 15 11, 873-881.

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2013.63

Related Posts

  • Ethical issues in the collection, storage, and research use of human biological materials Ethical issues in the collection, storage, and research use of human biological materials
    No Comments | Mar 14, 2014
  • Explanatory Memorandum, Crimes Act Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Bill (No. 1) 2006 (Commonwealth) Explanatory Memorandum, Crimes Act Amendment (Forensic Procedures) Bill (No. 1) 2006 (Commonwealth)
    No Comments | Mar 14, 2014
  • Citizens’ Values Regarding Research With Stored Samples From Newborn Screening in Canada Citizens’ Values Regarding Research With Stored Samples From Newborn Screening in Canada
    No Comments | Mar 14, 2014
  • Race and Ancestry in Biomedical Research: Exploring the Challenges Race and Ancestry in Biomedical Research: Exploring the Challenges
    No Comments | Mar 14, 2014

  • This site compiles the latest research and academic journals as part of an NHMRC funded study, 'Maximizing the utility and sustainability of tissue banks: Supporting translational research in Australia through informed regulation and community engagement'.

    This study is being conducted by the Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine and the Centre for Health, Governance, Law and Ethics based at the University of Sydney, Australia. The Network for Bodies Organs and Tissues is also contributing.

    A substantial portion of the material provided in the database on this website was collected for a project on personalized medicine at the Centre for Law and Genetics at the University of Tasmania. That project is funded by Australian Research Council Discovery Grant DP11010069.
  • Categories

    • Popular Posts
    • Recent Posts
    • You Are Born with Your Genes: Justice and Protection Against Discrimination in the Use of Genetic Information

      March 14, 2014
    • 12 Fingers or One, It’s How You Play? Genetic Discrimination in the Australian Workforce

      March 14, 2014
    • 2008 Best Practice for Repositories: Collection, Storage, Retrieval and Distribution of Biological Materials for Research

      March 14, 2014
    • ‘Access Arrangements’ for Biobanks: A Fine Line Between Facilitating and Hindering Collaboration

      March 14, 2014
    • Access to the UK Biobank Resource: Advising on the Public Interest and the Public Good

      March 14, 2014
    • You Are Born with Your Genes: Justice and Protection Against Discrimination in the Use of Genetic Information

      March 14, 2014
    • Works in progress: new technologies and the European Court of Human Rights

      March 14, 2014
    • Withdrawing from research: a rethink in the context of research biobanks

      March 14, 2014
    • Withdrawing from Participating in a Biobank – A Comparative Study

      March 14, 2014
    • Winds of Change: A Report to the European Commission’s Directore-General for Research

      March 14, 2014
  • Google News
    Australia : All

    Google News unavailable
  • Log In

  • Copyright © 2019 Biobank Research.
    • About the project
    • Advanced Search
    • Advanced Search Results
    • Case Law
    • International
    • Legislation
    • Resources