Influence of individual differences in disease perception on consumer response to direct-to-consumer genomic testing

Clinical Genetics

Volumn 87, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 225-232

  Boeldt, D L ^a   Schork, N J ^a,b   Topol, E J ^a,b,c   Bloss, C S ^a  

^a SCRIPPS HEALTH   (United States)

^b SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c SCRIPPS CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

Direct to consumer; Direct to consumer outcomes; Genetic testing; Genomic risk assessment; Health Belief Model; Personalized medicine; Risk perceptions

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALZHEIMER DISEASE; ANXIETY; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COLON CANCER; DIRECT TO CONSUMER GENOMIC TESTING; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASES; DISTRESS SYNDROME; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GENETIC RISK; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH BELIEF MODEL; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; LIFESTYLE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL EXAMINATION; MIDDLE AGED; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; OBESITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; GENETIC COUNSELING; INDIVIDUALITY; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PERCEPTION; RISK FACTOR; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATIENT OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PERCEPTION; RISK FACTORS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84922733942     PISSN: 00099163     EISSN: 13990004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/cge.12419     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Hall TO, Renz AD, Snapinn KW, Bowen DJ, Edwards KL. Awareness and uptake of direct-to-consumer genetic testing among cancer cases, their relatives, and controls: the Northwest Cancer Genetics Network. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2012: 16: 744-748.
2. Bloss CS, Schork NJ, Topol EJ. Effect of direct-to-consumer genome wide profiling to assess disease risk. N Engl J Med 2011: 364: 524-534.
3. Samuel GN, Jordens CF, Kerridge I. Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: ethical and regulatory issues that arise from wanting to 'know' your DNA. Intern Med J 2010: 40: 220-224.
4. Coghlan A. 23andMe ordered to stop selling $99 genetic test. Genetics: New Scientist 2013: 2945: 4.
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Inspections, Compliance, Enforcement, and Criminal Investigations: 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13. Warning letter. Accessed at www.fda.gove/iceci/enforcementactions/warningletters/2013/ucm376296.htm Accessed on 28 November, 2013.
6. Roberts JS, Ostergren J. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing and personal genomics services: a review of recent empirical studies. Curr Genet Med Rep 2013: 1: 182-200.
7. Kaufman DJ, Bollinger JM, Dvoskin RL, Scott JA. Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing. J Genet Couns 2012: 21: 413-422.
8. Egglestone C, Morris A, O'Brien A. Effect of direct-to-consumer genetic tests on health behaviour and anxiety: a survey of consumers and potential consumers. J Genet Couns 2013: 22: 565-575.
9. Collins RE, Wright AJ, Marteau TM. Impact of communicating personalized genetic risk information on perceived control over the risk: a systematic review. Genet Med 2011: 13: 273-277.
10. Bloss CS, Wineinger NE, Darst BF, Schork NJ, Topol EJ. Impact of direct-to-consumer genomic testing at long term follow-up. J Med Genet 2013: 50: 393-400.
11. McGuire AL. 1000 genomes on the road to personalized medicine. Per Med 2008: 5: 195-197.
12. Caulfield T, McGuire AL. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: perceptions, problems, and policy responses. Annu Rev Med 2012: 63: 23-33.
13. Champion VL. Instrument development for health belief model constructs. ANS Adv Nurs Sci 1984: 6: 73-85.
14. Champion VL, Skinner CS. The health belief model. In: Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, eds. Health behavior and health education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008: 45-62.
15. Bloss CS, Ornowski L, Silver E et al. Consumer perceptions of direct-to-consumer personalized genomic risk assessments. Genet Med 2010: 12: 556-566.
16. Demirtas B, Acikgoz I. Promoting attendance at cervical cancer screening: understanding the relationship with Turkish womens' health beliefs. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013: 14: 333-340.
17. Wallston KA, Strudler Wallston B, Smith S, Dobbins CJ. Perceived control and health. Curr Psychol 1987: 6: 5-25.
18. CHIS. California health interview survey, Vol. 2007. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Center for Health Policy Research, 2007.
19. Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene PR, Vagg PR, Jacobs AG. Manual for the state-trait anxiety inventory (form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, Incorporated, 1983.
20. Weiss DSM, Marmar CR. The impact of event scale - revised. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum, 1996.
21. Creamer M, Bell R, Failla S. Psychometric properties of the impact of event scale - revised. Behav Res Ther 2003: 41: 1489-1496.
22. Block G, Gillespie C, Rosenbaum EH, Jenson C. A rapid food screener to assess fat and fruit and vegetable intake. Am J Prev Med 2000: 18: 284-288.
23. Godin G, Shephard RJ. A simple method to assess exercise behavior in the community. Can J Appl Sport Sci 1985: 10: 141-146.
24. Breland JY, Fox AM, Horowitz CR, Leventhal H. Applying a common-sense approach to fighting obesity. J Obes 2012: 2012: 710427.
25. Hagger MS, Orbell S. A meta-analytic review of the common-sense model of illness representations. Psychol Health 2003: 18: 141-184.
26. James KM, Cowl CT, Tilburt JC et al. Impact of direct-to-consumer predictive genomic testing on risk perception and worry among patients receiving routine care in a preventive health clinic. Mayo Clin Proc 2011: 86: 933-940.
27. Shiloh S, Wade CH, Roberts JS, Alford SH, Biesecker BB. Associations between risk perceptions and worry about common diseases: a between- and within-subjects examination. Psychol Health 2013: 28: 434-449.
28. Wade CH, Shiloh S, Roberts JS, Hensley Alford S, Marteau TM, Biesecker BB. Preferences among diseases on a genetic susceptibility test for common health conditions: an ancillary study of the multiplex initiative. Public Health Genomics 2012: 15: 322-326.