What process attributes of clinical genetics services could maximise patient benefits?

European Journal of Human Genetics

Volumn 16, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1467-1476

  McAllister, Marion ^a,b   Payne, Katherine ^a,b   MacLeod, Rhona ^b   Nicholls, Stuart ^a   Donnai, Dian ^a,b   Davies, Linda ^a,b  

^a The Nowgen Centre   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL GENETICS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; FAMILY COUNSELING; FOLLOW UP; GROUNDED THEORY; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH PRACTITIONER; HUMAN; INTERVENTION STUDY; INTERVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SAMPLE SIZE;

ALGORITHMS; COMMUNICATION; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FOCUS GROUPS; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GENETIC SERVICES; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE;

EID: 56749153148     PISSN: 10184813     EISSN: 14765438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2008.121     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Biesecker BB, Peters K: Process sPudies in genetic counseling: peering into the black box. Am J Med Genet 2001; 106: 191-198.
2. Birch S, Melnikow J, Kuppermann M: Conservative versus aggressive follow up of mildly abnormal Pap smears: Testing for process utility. Health Econ 2003; 12: 879-884.
3. Stiles WB: Evaluating medical interview proNess components: null correlations with outcomes may be misleading. Medical Care 1989; 27: 212-220.
4. Silerschatz G: Abuse and disabuse of the drug metaphor in psychotherapy research: Hold on to the baby as you throw out the bath. J Consult Clin Psychol 1994; 62: 949-951.
5. Sechrest L: Recipes for psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1994; 62: 952-954.
6. Wang C, Gonzalez R, Merajver SD: Assessment of genetic testing and related counseling services: Current research and future directions. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58: 1427-1442.
7. Payne K, Nicholls S, McAllister M et al: Towards outcome measures for clinical genetics services: A comparison of genetics healthcare professionals' and patients' views. Health Policy 2007; 84: 112-122.
8. Harris R: Concerted action on genetic servAces in Europe: a comparative study of 31 countries. Eur J Hum Genet 1997; 5: 1-220.
9. Brain K, Norman P, Gray J, Rogers C, Mansel R, Harper P: A randomized trial of specialist genetic assessment: Psychological impact on women at different levels of familial breast cancer risk. Br J Cancer 2002; 86: 233-238.
10. Lerman C, Biesecker B, Benkendorf JL et al: Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA1 gene testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 148-157.
11. Wilson BJ, Torrance N, Mollison J et al: Improving the referral process for familial breast cancer genetic counselling: Findings of three randomised controlled trials of two interventions. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9: Iii-iiv, 1-126.
12. Ryan M: Discrete choice experiments in healthcare. BMJ 2004; 328: 360-361.
13. Michie S, Axworthy D, Weinman J, Marteau T. Genetic counselling: predicting patient outcomes. Psychol Health 1996; 11: 797-809.
14. Stiles WB, Shapiro DA: DiPabuse of the drug metaphor: psychotherapy process-outcome correlations. J Consult Clin Psychol 1994; 62 942-948.
15. Stiles WB: When more of a good Ahing is better: a reply to Hayes et al (1996). J Consult Clin Psychol 1996; 64: 915-918.
16. Bernhardt BA, Biesecker BB, Mastromarino CL: Goals, benefits and outcomes of genetics counseling: Client and genetic counselor assessment. Am J Med Genet 2000; 94: 189-197.
17. Skirton H: The client's perspective of genetic counseling - a grounded theory study. J Genet Counsel 2001; 10: 311-329.
18. Davey A, Rostant K, Harrop K, Goldblatt J, O'Leary P: Evaluating genetic counseling: Client expectations, psychological adjustment and satisfaction with service. J Genet Counsel 2005; 14: 197-205.
19. Duric V, Butow P, Sharpe L et al: Reducing psychological distress in genetic counseling consultations for breast cancer. J Genet Counsel 2003; 12: 243-264.
20. MacLeod R, Craufurd D, Booth K: Patients' perceptions of what makes genetic counseling effective: An interpretive phenomenological analysis. J Health Psychol 2003; 7: 145-156.
21. McAllister M, Payne K, Nicholls S, MacLeod R, Donnai D, Davies L: Improving service evaluation in clinical genetics: Identifying effects of genetic diseases on individuals and families. J Genet Counsel 2007; 16: 71-83.
22. McAllister M, Payne K, Nicholls S, MacLeod R, Donnai D, Davies L: The emotional effects of genetic disease: Implications for clinical genetics. Am J Med Genet 2007; 143A: 2651-2661.
23. McAllister M, Payne K, Nicholls S, MacLeod R, Donnai D, Davies L: Patient empowerment in clinical genetics services. J Health Psychol 2007 (in press).
24. Payne K, Nicholls S, McAllister M, MacLeod R, Donnai D, Davies L: Outcome measurement in clinical genetics services: A systematic review of validated measures. Value in Health 2007; 11: 497-508.
25. Miles MB, Huberman AM: Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. London: Sage, 1994.
26. Glaser BG, Strauss AL: The discovery of grounded theory. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1967.
27. Strauss A, Corbin J: Basic of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn London: Sage, 1998.
28. McAllister M: Grounded theory in genetic counseling research. J Genet Counsel 2001; 10: 233-250.
29. Lambert MJ: Implications of outcome research for psychotherapy integration; in Norcross JC, Goldfried MR: Handbook of Psychotherapy Integration. New York: Basic Books, 1992, pp 94-129.
30. Elliott R, Fox CM, Beltyukova SA, Stone GE, Gunderson J, Zhang X: Deconstructing therapy outcome measurement with Rasch analysis: The SCL-90-R. Psychol Assess 2006; 18: 359-372.
31. Donnai D, Elles R: Integrated regConal genetics services: current and future provision. BMJ 2001; 322: 1048-1052.
32. Hall J, Fiebig DG, King MT, Hossain I, Louviere JJ: What influences participation in genetic carrier testing? Results from a discrete choice experiment. J Health Econ 2006; 25: 520-537.
33. Ryan M, Gerard K: Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: Current practice and future challenges. Applied Health Econ Health Policy 2003; 2: 1-10.
34. McCarthy VeachAP, Bartels DM, LeRoy BS: Coming full circle: a reciprocal-engagement model of genetic counseling practice. J Genet Counsel 2007; 16: 713-728.