Modeling the dyadic effects of parenting, stress, and coping on parent-child communication in families tested for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer risk

Decision-making about genetic health information among family dyads: a systematic literature review

Decisions involving two individuals (i.e., dyadic decision-making) have been increasingly studied in healthcare research. There is evidence of bi-directional influences in decision-making processes among spousal, provider-patient and parent-child dyads. Genetic information can directly impact biologically related individuals. Thus, it is important to understand dyadic decision-making about genetic health information among family members. This systematic literature review aimed to identify literature examining decision-making among family dyads. Peer-reviewed publications were included if they reported quantitative empirical research on dyadic decision-making about genetic information, published between January 1998 and August 2020 and written in English. The search was conducted in 6 databases and returned 3167 articles, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were in the context of cancer genetic testing (n = 8) or reproductive testing or screening (n = 5). Studies reported two broad categories of decisions with dyadic influence: undergoing screening or testing (n = 10) and sharing information with family (n = 5). Factors were correlated between dyads such as attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and psychological wellbeing. Emerging evidence shows that dyad members influence each other when making decisions about receiving or sharing genetic information. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering both members of a dyad in intervention design and clinical interactions.

A scoping review of social and behavioral science research to translate genomic discoveries into population health impact

Since the completion of the Human Genome Project, progress toward translating genomic research discoveries to address population health issues has been limited. Several meetings of social and behavioral scientists have outlined priority research areas where advancement of translational research could increase population health benefits of genomic discoveries. In this review, we track the pace of progress, study size and design, and focus of genomics translational research from 2012 to 2018 and its concordance with five social and behavioral science recommended priorities. We conducted a review of the literature following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Guidelines for Scoping Reviews. Steps involved completing a search in five databases and a hand search of bibliographies of relevant literature. Our search (from 2012 to 2018) yielded 4,538 unique studies; 117 were included in the final analyses. Two coders extracted data including items from the PICOTS framework. Analysis included descriptive statistics to help identify trends in pace, study size and design, and translational priority area. Among the 117 studies included in our final sample, nearly half focused on genomics applications that have evidence to support translation or implementation into practice (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Tier 1 applications). Common study designs were cross-sectional (40.2%) and qualitative (24.8%), with average sample sizes of 716 across all studies. Most often, studies addressed public understanding of genetics and genomics (33.3%), risk communication (29.1%), and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change (19.7%). The number of studies that address social and behavioral science priority areas is extremely limited and the pace of this research continues to lag behind basic science advances. Much of the research identified in this review is descriptive and related to public understanding, risk communication, and intervention development and testing of interventions to promote behavior change. The field has been slow to develop and evaluate public health-friendly interventions and test implementation approaches that could enable health benefits and equitable access to genomic discoveries. As the completion of the human genome approaches its 20th anniversary, full engagement of transdisciplinary efforts to address translation challenges will be required to close this gap.

Parent-Child Communication and Reproductive Considerations in Families with Genetic Cancer Predisposition Syndromes: A Systematic Review

Background: Uptake of genetic testing for heritable conditions is increasingly common. In families with known autosomal dominant genetic cancer predisposition syndromes (CPS), testing youth may reduce uncertainty and provide guidance for future lifestyle, medical, and family building considerations. The goals of this systematic review were to examine: (1) how parents and their children, adolescents, and young adults (CAYAs) communicate and make decisions regarding testing for CPS and (2) how they communicate and make decisions about reproductive health/family building in the context of risk for CPS. Methods: Searches of MEDLINE/Pubmed, CINAHL, Web of Science, and PsycINFO yielded 4161 articles since January 1, 2000, which contained terms related to youth, pediatrics, decision-making, genetic cancer predispositions, communication, and family building. Results: Articles retained (N = 15) included five qualitative, six quantitative, and four mixed-method designs. Parents generally agreed testing results should be disclosed to CAYAs at risk or affected by genetic conditions in a developmentally appropriate manner. Older child age and child desire for information were associated with disclosure. Greater knowledge about risk prompted adolescents and young adults to consider the potential impact on future relationships and family building. Conclusions: Most parents believed it was their responsibility to inform their CAYAs about genetic testing results, particularly to optimize engagement in recommended preventative screening/lifestyle behaviors. Disclosing test results may be challenging due to concerns such as young age, developmental appropriateness, and emotional burden. Additional research is needed on how CPS risk affects CAYAs' decisions about reproductive health and family building over time.