1
|
Nisselle A, Terrill B, Janinski M, Martyn M, Jordan H, Kaunein N, Metcalfe S, Gaff C. Ensuring best practice in genomics education: A theory- and empirically informed evaluation framework. Am J Hum Genet 2024:S0002-9297(24)00210-6. [PMID: 38959883 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2024.06.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2023] [Revised: 06/12/2024] [Accepted: 06/13/2024] [Indexed: 07/05/2024] Open
Abstract
Implementation of genomic medicine into healthcare requires a workforce educated through effective educational approaches. However, ascertaining the impact of genomics education activities or resources is limited by a lack of evaluation and inconsistent descriptions in the literature. We aim to support those developing genomics education to consider how best to capture evaluation data that demonstrate program outcomes and effectiveness within scope. Here, we present an evaluation framework that is adaptable to multiple settings for use by genomics educators with or without education or evaluation backgrounds. The framework was developed as part of a broader program supporting genomic research translation coordinated by the Australian Genomics consortium. We detail our mixed-methods approach involving an expert workshop, literature review and iterative expert input to reach consensus and synthesis of a new evaluation framework for genomics education. The resulting theory-informed and evidence-based framework encompasses evaluation across all stages of education program development, implementation and reporting, and acknowledges the critical role of stakeholders and the effects of external influences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Nisselle
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Bronwyn Terrill
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Monika Janinski
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Melissa Martyn
- Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Helen Jordan
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Nadia Kaunein
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Melbourne Dental School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Sylvia Metcalfe
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Clara Gaff
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ma A, Newing TP, O'Shea R, Gokoolparsadh A, Murdoch E, Hayward J, Shannon G, Kevin L, Bennetts B, Ho G, Smith J, Shah M, Jones KJ, Josephi-Taylor S, Sandaradura SA, Adès L, Jamieson R, Rankin NM. Genomic multidisciplinary teams: A model for navigating genetic mainstreaming and precision medicine. J Paediatr Child Health 2024; 60:118-124. [PMID: 38605555 DOI: 10.1111/jpc.16547] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2023] [Revised: 03/27/2024] [Accepted: 04/04/2024] [Indexed: 04/13/2024]
Abstract
AIM Recent rapid advances in genomics are revolutionising patient diagnosis and management of genetic conditions. However, this has led to many challenges in service provision, education and upskilling requirements for non-genetics health-care professionals and remuneration for genomic testing. In Australia, Medicare funding with a Paediatric genomic testing item for patients with intellectual disability or syndromic features has attempted to address this latter issue. The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead (SCHN-W) Clinical Genetics Department established Paediatric and Neurology genomic multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings to address the Medicare-specified requirement for discussion with clinical genetics, and increasing genomic testing advice requests. METHODS This SCHN-W genomic MDT was evaluated with two implementation science frameworks - the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) and GMIR - Genomic Medicine Integrative Research frameworks. Data from June 2020 to July 2022 were synthesised and evaluated, as well as process mapping of the MDT service. RESULTS A total of 205 patients were discussed in 34 MDT meetings, facilitating 148 genomic tests, of which 73 were Medicare eligible. This was equivalent to 26% of SCHN-W genetics outpatient activity, and 13% of all Medicare-funded paediatric genomic testing in NSW. 39% of patients received a genetic diagnosis. CONCLUSION The genomic MDT facilitated increased genomic testing at a tertiary paediatric centre and is an effective model for mainstreaming and facilitating precision medicine. However, significant implementation issues were identified including cost and sustainability, as well as the high level of resourcing that will be required to scale up this approach to other areas of medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Ma
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Timothy P Newing
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Rosie O'Shea
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Akira Gokoolparsadh
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Emma Murdoch
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Janette Hayward
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gillian Shannon
- Western NSW Local Health District, Dubbo, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lucy Kevin
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Bruce Bennetts
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Molecular Genetics, Sydney Genome Diagnostics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Gladys Ho
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Department of Molecular Genetics, Sydney Genome Diagnostics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Janine Smith
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Margit Shah
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Kristi J Jones
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sarah Josephi-Taylor
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Sarah A Sandaradura
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Lesley Adès
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Robyn Jamieson
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network - Westmead, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
- Eye Genetics Research Unit, Children's Medical Research Institute, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Nicole M Rankin
- Evaluation and Implementation Science Unit, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ma A, O'Shea R, Wedd L, Wong C, Jamieson RV, Rankin N. What is the power of a genomic multidisciplinary team approach? A systematic review of implementation and sustainability. Eur J Hum Genet 2024; 32:381-391. [PMID: 38378794 PMCID: PMC10999446 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-024-01555-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2023] [Revised: 12/07/2023] [Accepted: 01/26/2024] [Indexed: 02/22/2024] Open
Abstract
Due to the increasing complexity of genomic data interpretation, and need for close collaboration with clinical, laboratory, and research expertise, genomics often requires a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach. This systematic review aims to establish the evidence for effectiveness of the genomic multidisciplinary team, and the implementation components of this model that can inform precision care. MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO databases were searched in 2022 and 2023. We included qualitative and quantitative studies of the genomic MDT, including observational and cohort studies, for diagnosis and management, and implementation outcomes of effectiveness, adoption, efficiency, safety, and acceptability. A narrative synthesis was mapped against the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research framework. 1530 studies were screened, and 17 papers met selection criteria. All studies pointed towards the effectiveness of the genomic MDT approach, with 10-78% diagnostic yield depending on clinical context, and an increased yield of 6-25% attributed to the MDT. The genomic MDT was found to be highly efficient in interpretation of variants of uncertain significance, timeliness for a rapid result, made a significant impact on management, and was acceptable for adoption by a wide variety of subspecialists. Only one study utilized an implementation science based approach. The genomic MDT approach appears to be highly effective and efficient, facilitating higher diagnostic rates and improved patient management. However, key gaps remain in health systems readiness for this collaborative model, and there is a lack of implementation science based research especially addressing the cost, sustainability, scale up, and equity of access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Ma
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Children's Hospital at Westmead, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
- Eye Genetics Research Unit, Children's Medical Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Rosie O'Shea
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Laura Wedd
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Children's Hospital at Westmead, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Eye Genetics Research Unit, Children's Medical Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Claire Wong
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Children's Hospital at Westmead, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Robyn V Jamieson
- Specialty of Genomic Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Children's Hospital at Westmead, The Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Eye Genetics Research Unit, Children's Medical Research Institute, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nicole Rankin
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Preys CL, Blout Zawatsky CL, Massmann A, Heukelom JV, Green RC, Hajek C, Hickingbotham MR, Zoltick ES, Schultz A, Christensen KD. Attitudes about pharmacogenomic testing vary by healthcare specialty. Pharmacogenomics 2023; 24:539-549. [PMID: 37458095 PMCID: PMC10621761 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2023-0039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2023] [Accepted: 06/27/2023] [Indexed: 07/18/2023] Open
Abstract
Aim: To understand how attitudes toward pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing among healthcare providers varies by specialty. Methods: Providers reported comfort ordering PGx testing and its perceived utility on web-based surveys before and after genetics education. Primary quantitative analyses compared primary care providers (PCPs) to specialty providers at both timepoints. Results: PCPs were more likely than specialty care providers to rate PGx testing as useful at both timepoints. Education increased comfort ordering PGx tests, with larger improvements among PCPs than specialty providers. Over 90% of cardiology and internal medicine providers rated PGx testing as useful at pre- and post-education. Conclusion: PCPs overwhelmingly perceive PGx to be useful, and provider education is particularly effective for improving PCPs' confidence. Education for all specialties will be essential to ensure appropriate integration into routine practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlene L Preys
- MGH Institute of Health Professions, Charlestown, MA 02129, USA
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Carrie L Blout Zawatsky
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Amanda Massmann
- Sanford Imagenetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57105, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Dakota School of Medicine, Vermilion, SD 57069, USA
| | - Joel Van Heukelom
- Sanford Imagenetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57105, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Dakota School of Medicine, Vermilion, SD 57069, USA
| | - Robert C Green
- Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA
| | - Catherine Hajek
- Sanford Imagenetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57105, USA
- Helix OpCo, LLC, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
| | - Madison R Hickingbotham
- Precision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - Emilie S Zoltick
- Precision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
| | - April Schultz
- Sanford Imagenetics, Sanford Health, Sioux Falls, SD 57105, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Dakota School of Medicine, Vermilion, SD 57069, USA
| | - Kurt D Christensen
- Ariadne Labs, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- Precision Medicine Translational Research (PROMoTeR) Center, Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA 02215, USA
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Milko LV, Berg JS. Age-Based Genomic Screening during Childhood: Ethical and Practical Considerations in Public Health Genomics Implementation. Int J Neonatal Screen 2023; 9:36. [PMID: 37489489 PMCID: PMC10366892 DOI: 10.3390/ijns9030036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2023] [Revised: 06/07/2023] [Accepted: 06/21/2023] [Indexed: 07/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Genomic sequencing offers an unprecedented opportunity to detect inherited variants that are implicated in rare Mendelian disorders, yet there are many challenges to overcome before this technology can routinely be applied in the healthy population. The age-based genomic screening (ABGS) approach is a novel alternative to genome-scale sequencing at birth that aims to provide highly actionable genetic information to parents over the course of their child's routine health care. ABGS utilizes an established metric to identify conditions with high clinical actionability and incorporates information about the age of onset and age of intervention to determine the optimal time to screen for any given condition. Ongoing partnerships with parents and providers are instrumental to the co-creation of educational resources and strategies to address potential implementation barriers. Implementation science frameworks and informative empirical data are used to evaluate strategies to establish this unique clinical application of targeted genomic sequencing. Ultimately, a pilot project conducted in primary care pediatrics clinics will assess patient and implementation outcomes, parent and provider perspectives, and the feasibility of ABGS. A validated, stakeholder-informed, and practical ABGS program will include hundreds of conditions that are actionable during infancy and childhood, setting the stage for a longitudinal implementation that can assess clinical and health economic outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura V. Milko
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 120 Mason Farm Rd., Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7264, USA;
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
O’Shea R, Crook A, Jacobs C, Kentwell M, Gleeson M, Tucker KM, Hampel H, Rahm AK, Taylor N, Lewis S, Rankin NM. A mainstreaming oncogenomics model: improving the identification of Lynch syndrome. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1140135. [PMID: 37305562 PMCID: PMC10256118 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1140135] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 06/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction "Mainstreaming" is a proposed strategy to integrate genomic testing into oncology. The aim of this paper is to develop a mainstreaming oncogenomics model by identifying health system interventions and implementation strategies for mainstreaming Lynch syndrome genomic testing. Methods A rigorous theoretical approach inclusive of conducting a systematic review and qualitative and quantitative studies was undertaken using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Theory-informed implementation data were mapped to the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research framework to generate potential strategies. Results The systematic review identified a lack of theory-guided health system interventions and evaluation for Lynch syndrome and other mainstreaming programs. The qualitative study phase included 22 participants from 12 health organizations. The quantitative Lynch syndrome survey included 198 responses: 26% and 66% from genetic and oncology health professionals, respectively. Studies identified the relative advantage and clinical utility of mainstreaming to improve genetic test access and to streamline care, and adaptation of current processes was recognized for results delivery and follow-up. Barriers identified included funding, infrastructure and resources, and the need for process and role delineation. The interventions to overcome barriers were as follows: embedded mainstream genetic counselors, electronic medical record genetic test ordering, results tracking, and mainstreaming education resources. Implementation evidence was connected through the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research framework resulting in a mainstreaming oncogenomics model. Discussion The proposed mainstreaming oncogenomics model acts as a complex intervention. It features an adaptable suite of implementation strategies to inform Lynch syndrome and other hereditary cancer service delivery. Implementation and evaluation of the model are required in future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rosie O’Shea
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Ashley Crook
- Discipline of Genetic Counselling, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Chris Jacobs
- Discipline of Genetic Counselling, Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Maira Kentwell
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Department of Oncology, Royal Women’s Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Margaret Gleeson
- Hunter Genetics, Hunter Family Cancer Service, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
| | | | - Heather Hampel
- Division of Clinical Cancer Genomics, Department of Medical Oncology and Therapeutics Research, City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, United States
| | | | - Natalie Taylor
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Cancer Research Division, Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Sarah Lewis
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Nicole M. Rankin
- Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, Melbourne University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Russell H, Smith HS, Bensen JT, Murali P, Ferket BS, Finnila C, Hindorff LA, Sahin-Hodoglugil N. Lessons learned while starting multi-institutional genetics research in diverse populations: A report from the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium. Contemp Clin Trials 2023; 125:107063. [PMID: 36567057 PMCID: PMC9918690 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.107063] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2022] [Revised: 11/28/2022] [Accepted: 12/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Increasing diversity in clinical trial participation is necessary to improve health outcomes and requires addressing existing social, structural, and geographic barriers. The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium (CSER) included six research projects to enroll historically underrepresented/underserved (UR/US) populations in clinical genomics research. Delays and project re-designs emerged shortly after work began. Understanding common experiences of these projects may inform future trial implementation. METHODS Semi-structured interviews with six CSER principal investigators and seven project managers were performed. An interview guide included questions of research/clinical infrastructure, logistics across sites, language, communication, and allocation of grant-related resources. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim; transcripts were analyzed using inductive coding, thematic analysis and consensus building. RESULTS All projects collaborating with new clinical sub-sites to recruit UR/US populations. Refining trial logistics continued long after enrollment for all projects. Themes of challenges included: sub-site customization for workflow and genetics support, conflicting input from participant advisory groups and approval bodies, developing research personnel, complex data management structures, and external changes (e.g. subcontractors ending contracts) that required redesign. Themes of beneficial lessons included: domains with prior experience were easier, develop project champions at each sub-site, structure communication within the research team, and simplify research design when possible. CONCLUSIONS The operational aspects of expanding clinical research into novel sub-sites are significant and require investment of time and resources. The themes arising from these interviews suggest priority areas for more quantitative analyses in the future including multi-institutional approval policies and processes, data management structures, and incremental research complexity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heidi Russell
- Department of Pediatrics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Hadley Stevens Smith
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Jeannette T Bensen
- Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Priyanka Murali
- Department of Public Health Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Bart S Ferket
- Institute for Healthcare Delivery Science, Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Candice Finnila
- HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL, USA
| | - Lucia A Hindorff
- Division of Genomic Medicine, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Nuriye Sahin-Hodoglugil
- Institute for Human Genetics, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
O'Shea R, Ma AS, Jamieson RV, Rankin NM. Precision medicine in Australia: now is the time to get it right. Med J Aust 2022; 217:559-563. [PMID: 36436133 PMCID: PMC10100177 DOI: 10.5694/mja2.51777] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2022] [Revised: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 08/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alan S Ma
- University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.,Western Sydney Genetics Program, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW
| | - Robyn V Jamieson
- University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.,Western Sydney Genetics Program, Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney Children's Hospitals Network, Sydney, NSW
| | - Nicole M Rankin
- University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW.,Centre for Health Policy, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Leon-Astudillo C, Byrne BJ, Salloum RG. Addressing the implementation gap in advanced therapeutics for spinal muscular atrophy in the era of newborn screening programs. Front Neurol 2022; 13:1064194. [PMID: 36578307 PMCID: PMC9790909 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.1064194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2022] [Accepted: 11/21/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a rare genetic disease that results in progressive neuromuscular weakness. Without therapy, the most common form of the disease, type 1, typically results in death or chronic respiratory failure in the first 2 years of life. Thanks to the recent introduction of newborn screening programs and the discovery of three disease-modifying therapies in the last decade, the outcomes of children with SMA have dramatically improved. Patients are able to achieve many, if not all, of the typical neuromotor milestones, such as sitting, standing and walking, as well as safe oral intake. As the natural history of treated patients is continuously evolving, children with SMA continue to require complex and multidisciplinary care, posing implementation and sustainability challenges. Accordingly, there is a significant need for the application and evaluation of implementation science to address the steps involved in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with SMA, ensuring that all pertinent stakeholders and systems are working effectively to deliver timely and appropriate care. In this manuscript, we discuss the current challenges and gaps in the care for children with SMA, as well as how implementation science can advance this field. In addition, we provide an adapted implementation science framework that includes the main domains and subdomains involved in the care of patients with SMA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carmen Leon-Astudillo
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, United States,*Correspondence: Carmen Leon-Astudillo
| | - Barry J. Byrne
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, United States
| | - Ramzi G. Salloum
- Department of Health Outcomes and Biomedical Informatics, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Eadon MT, Cavanaugh KL, Orlando LA, Christian D, Chakraborty H, Steen-Burrell KA, Merrill P, Seo J, Hauser D, Singh R, Beasley CM, Fuloria J, Kitzman H, Parker AS, Ramos M, Ong HH, Elwood EN, Lynch SE, Clermont S, Cicali EJ, Starostik P, Pratt VM, Nguyen KA, Rosenman MB, Calman NS, Robinson M, Nadkarni GN, Madden EB, Kucher N, Volpi S, Dexter PR, Skaar TC, Johnson JA, Cooper-DeHoff RM, Horowitz CR. Design and rationale of GUARDD-US: A pragmatic, randomized trial of genetic testing for APOL1 and pharmacogenomic predictors of antihypertensive efficacy in patients with hypertension. Contemp Clin Trials 2022; 119:106813. [PMID: 35660539 PMCID: PMC9928488 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2022.106813] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2022] [Revised: 05/25/2022] [Accepted: 05/30/2022] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVE APOL1 risk alleles are associated with increased cardiovascular and chronic kidney disease (CKD) risk. It is unknown whether knowledge of APOL1 risk status motivates patients and providers to attain recommended blood pressure (BP) targets to reduce cardiovascular disease. STUDY DESIGN Multicenter, pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS 6650 individuals with African ancestry and hypertension from 13 health systems. INTERVENTION APOL1 genotyping with clinical decision support (CDS) results are returned to participants and providers immediately (intervention) or at 6 months (control). A subset of participants are re-randomized to pharmacogenomic testing for relevant antihypertensive medications (pharmacogenomic sub-study). CDS alerts encourage appropriate CKD screening and antihypertensive agent use. OUTCOMES Blood pressure and surveys are assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months. The primary outcome is change in systolic BP from enrollment to 3 months in individuals with two APOL1 risk alleles. Secondary outcomes include new diagnoses of CKD, systolic blood pressure at 6 months, diastolic BP, and survey results. The pharmacogenomic sub-study will evaluate the relationship of pharmacogenomic genotype and change in systolic BP between baseline and 3 months. RESULTS To date, the trial has enrolled 3423 participants. CONCLUSIONS The effect of patient and provider knowledge of APOL1 genotype on systolic blood pressure has not been well-studied. GUARDD-US addresses whether blood pressure improves when patients and providers have this information. GUARDD-US provides a CDS framework for primary care and specialty clinics to incorporate APOL1 genetic risk and pharmacogenomic prescribing in the electronic health record. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.govNCT04191824.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael T Eadon
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | | | - Lori A Orlando
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27720, USA
| | - David Christian
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Hrishikesh Chakraborty
- Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC 27720, USA; Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC 27720, USA
| | | | - Peter Merrill
- Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC 27720, USA
| | - Janet Seo
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Diane Hauser
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; Institute for Family Health, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Rajbir Singh
- Meharry Medical College, Nashville, TN 37208, USA
| | - Cherry Maynor Beasley
- McKenzie-Elliott School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, Pembroke, NC 28372, USA
| | - Jyotsna Fuloria
- Office of Research, University Medical Center New Orleans, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA
| | - Heather Kitzman
- Baylor Scott & White Health, Baylor University, Robbins Institute for Health Policy & Leadership, Dallas, TX 75246, USA
| | - Alexander S Parker
- University of Florida College of Medicine - Jacksonville, Jacksonville, FL 32209, USA
| | - Michelle Ramos
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Henry H Ong
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232, USA
| | - Erica N Elwood
- University of Florida, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | - Sheryl E Lynch
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Sabrina Clermont
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Emily J Cicali
- University of Florida, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | - Petr Starostik
- University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | - Victoria M Pratt
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Khoa A Nguyen
- University of Florida, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | - Marc B Rosenman
- Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL 60611, USA
| | - Neil S Calman
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; Institute for Family Health, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | | | - Girish N Nadkarni
- Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA
| | - Ebony B Madden
- Division of Genomic Medicine, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Natalie Kucher
- Division of Genomic Medicine, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Simona Volpi
- Division of Genomic Medicine, National Human Genome Research Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA
| | - Paul R Dexter
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Todd C Skaar
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
| | - Julie A Johnson
- University of Florida, College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA
| | | | - Carol R Horowitz
- Institute for Health Equity Research, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA; Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY 10029, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Salloum RG, Bishop JR, Elchynski AL, Smith DM, Rowe E, Blake KV, Limdi NA, Aquilante CL, Bates J, Beitelshees AL, Cipriani A, Duong BQ, Empey PE, Formea CM, Hicks JK, Mroz P, Oslin D, Pasternak AL, Petry N, Ramsey LB, Schlichte A, Swain SM, Ward KM, Wiisanen K, Skaar TC, Van Driest SL, Cavallari LH, Tuteja S. Best-worst scaling methodology to evaluate constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: application to the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing for antidepressant therapy. Implement Sci Commun 2022; 3:52. [PMID: 35568931 PMCID: PMC9107643 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-022-00300-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/23/2022] [Accepted: 04/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Despite the increased demand for pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, little is known about how to implement testing in clinical practice. Best–worst scaling (BWS) is a stated preferences technique for determining the relative importance of alternative scenarios and is increasingly being used as a healthcare assessment tool, with potential applications in implementation research. We conducted a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of implementation factors for PGx testing to guide antidepressant use. Methods We surveyed 17 healthcare organizations that either had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. The survey included a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs from the perspective of implementing sites. Results Participating sites varied on their PGx testing platform and methods for returning recommendations to providers and patients, but they were consistent in ranking several CFIR constructs as most important for implementation: patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and identification of champions. Conclusions This study demonstrates the feasibility of using choice experiments to systematically evaluate the relative importance of implementation determinants from the perspective of implementing organizations. BWS findings can inform other organizations interested in implementing PGx testing for mental health. Further, this study demonstrates the application of BWS to PGx, the findings of which may be used by other organizations to inform implementation of PGx testing for mental health disorders. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43058-022-00300-7.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ramzi G Salloum
- University of Florida Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Gainesville, FL, USA.,University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Jeffrey R Bishop
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.,University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | | | - D Max Smith
- MedStar Health, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Elizabeth Rowe
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | | | - Nita A Limdi
- University of Alabama Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | | | - Jill Bates
- Durham VA Healthcare System, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Amber Cipriani
- University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | - Philip E Empey
- University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | | | - Pawel Mroz
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| | - David Oslin
- Corporal Michael J. Cresenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Amy L Pasternak
- University of Michigan College of Pharmacy, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - Natasha Petry
- North Dakota State University/Sanford Health, Fargo, ND, USA
| | - Laura B Ramsey
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA
| | | | - Sandra M Swain
- MedStar Health, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kristen M Ward
- University of Michigan College of Pharmacy, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | | | - Todd C Skaar
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | | | - Larisa H Cavallari
- University of Florida Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Gainesville, FL, USA.,University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Sony Tuteja
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Smilow Center for Translational Research, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Bldg. 421 11th Floor, Room 143, Philadelphia, PA, 19104-5158, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Brown HL, Sherburn IA, Gaff C, Taylor N, Best S. Structured approaches to implementation of clinical genomics: A scoping review. Genet Med 2022; 24:1415-1424. [PMID: 35442192 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2021] [Revised: 03/18/2022] [Accepted: 03/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to assess the extent to which structured approaches to implementation of clinical genomics, proposed or adapted, are informed by evidence. METHODS A systematic approach was used to identify peer-reviewed articles and gray literature to report on 4 research questions: 1. What structured approaches have been proposed to support implementation? 2. To what extent are the structured approaches informed by evidence? 3. How have structured approaches been deployed in the genomic setting? 4. What are the intended outcomes of the structured approaches? RESULTS A total of 30 unique structured approaches to implementation were reported across 23 peer-reviewed publications and 11 gray literature articles. Most approaches were process models, applied in the preadoption implementation phase, focusing on a "service" outcome. Key findings included a lack of implementation science theory informing the development/implementation of newly designed structured approaches in the genomic setting and a lack of measures to assess implementation effectiveness. CONCLUSION This scoping review identified a significant number of structured approaches developed to inform the implementation of genomic medicine into clinical practice, with limited use of implementation science to support the process. We recommend the use of existing implementation science theory and the expertise of implementation scientists to inform the design of genomic programs being implemented into clinical care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Helen L Brown
- Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
| | - Isabella A Sherburn
- Australian Genomics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Clara Gaff
- Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Paediatrics, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Natalie Taylor
- School of Population Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Stephanie Best
- Australian Genomics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Australian Institute of Health Innovation (AIHI), Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kaphingst KA, Bather JR, Daly BM, Chavez-Yenter D, Vega A, Kohlmann WK. Interest in Cancer Predisposition Testing and Carrier Screening Offered as Part of Routine Healthcare Among an Ethnically Diverse Sample of Young Women. Front Genet 2022; 13:866062. [PMID: 35495140 PMCID: PMC9047995 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.866062] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2022] [Accepted: 03/17/2022] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Sequencing technologies can inform individuals’ risks for multiple conditions, supporting population-level screening approaches. Prior research examining interest in genetic testing has not generally examined the context of population-based approaches offered in routine healthcare or among ethnically diverse populations. Cancer predisposition testing and carrier screening could be offered broadly to women of reproductive age. This study therefore examined interest in these tests when offered as part of routine care, and predictors of interest, among an ethnically diverse sample of women aged 20–35. We conducted an online English-language survey of 450 women; 39% identified as Latina. We examined predictors of interest for two outcomes, interest in testing in the next year and level of interest, in multivariable logistic regression models and stratified analyses by Latina ethnicity. More than half of respondents reported being interested in cancer predisposition testing (55%) and carrier screening (56%) in the next year; this did not differ by ethnicity. About 26% reported being very interested in cancer predisposition testing and 27% in carrier screening. Latina respondents (32%) were more likely to be very interested in cancer predisposition testing than non-Latina respondents (22%; p < 0.03). In multivariable models, having higher worry about genetic risks, higher genetic knowledge, and higher perceived importance of genetic information were associated with higher interest across multiple models. Predictors of interest were generally similar by ethnicity. Our findings show substantial interest in both cancer predisposition testing and carrier screening among young women as part of routine healthcare with similar interest between Latina and non-Latina women. Efforts to broadly offer such testing could be important in improving access to genetic information. It will be critical to develop tools to help healthcare providers communicate about genetic testing and to address the needs of those who have less prior knowledge about genetics to support informed decision making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kimberly A. Kaphingst
- Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
- *Correspondence: Kimberly A. Kaphingst,
| | - Jemar R. Bather
- Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
| | - Brianne M. Daly
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Daniel Chavez-Yenter
- Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Alexis Vega
- Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Wendy K. Kohlmann
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Lau-Min KS, Varughese LA, Nelson MN, Cambareri C, Reddy NJ, Oyer RA, Teitelbaum UR, Tuteja S. Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies: a qualitative study of barriers to implementation. BMC Cancer 2022; 22:47. [PMID: 34996412 PMCID: PMC8742388 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-09171-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 12/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing for germline variants in the DPYD and UGT1A1 genes can be used to guide fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan dosing, respectively. Despite the known association between PGx variants and chemotherapy toxicity, preemptive testing prior to chemotherapy initiation is rarely performed in routine practice. Methods We conducted a qualitative study of oncology clinicians to identify barriers to using preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies. Each participant completed a semi-structured interview informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Interviews were analyzed using an inductive content analysis approach. Results Participants included sixteen medical oncologists and nine oncology pharmacists from one academic medical center and two community hospitals in Pennsylvania. Barriers to the use of preemptive PGx testing to guide chemotherapy dosing mapped to four CFIR domains: intervention characteristics, outer setting, inner setting, and characteristics of individuals. The most prominent themes included 1) a limited evidence base, 2) a cumbersome and lengthy testing process, and 3) a lack of insurance coverage for preemptive PGx testing. Additional barriers included clinician lack of knowledge, difficulty remembering to order PGx testing for eligible patients, challenges with PGx test interpretation, a questionable impact of preemptive PGx testing on clinical care, and a lack of alternative therapeutic options for some patients found to have actionable PGx variants. Conclusions Successful adoption of preemptive PGx-guided chemotherapy dosing in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies will require a multifaceted effort to demonstrate clinical effectiveness while addressing the contextual factors identified in this study. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09171-6.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelsey S Lau-Min
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Lisa A Varughese
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, Smilow Center for Translational Research, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Bldg. 421 11th Floor, Room 143, Philadelphia, PA, 19104-5158, USA
| | | | - Christine Cambareri
- Department of Pharmacy, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Nandi J Reddy
- Ann B. Barshinger Cancer Institute, Penn Medicine at Lancaster General Health, Lancaster, PA, USA
| | - Randall A Oyer
- Ann B. Barshinger Cancer Institute, Penn Medicine at Lancaster General Health, Lancaster, PA, USA
| | - Ursina R Teitelbaum
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Sony Tuteja
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, Smilow Center for Translational Research, University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Civic Center Boulevard, Bldg. 421 11th Floor, Room 143, Philadelphia, PA, 19104-5158, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Morel-Laforce T, Ravitsky V, Laberge AM. La recherche translationnelle et la science de l’implantation : des outils pour les bioéthiciens pour étudier les enjeux éthiques de nouvelles technologies. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS 2022. [DOI: 10.7202/1089788ar] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
|
16
|
Examining access to care in clinical genomic research and medicine: Experiences from the CSER Consortium. J Clin Transl Sci 2021; 5:e193. [PMID: 34888063 PMCID: PMC8634302 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2021.855] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/13/2021] [Revised: 08/30/2021] [Accepted: 09/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction: Ensuring equitable access to health care is a widely agreed-upon goal in medicine, yet access to care is a multidimensional concept that is difficult to measure. Although frameworks exist to evaluate access to care generally, the concept of “access to genomic medicine” is largely unexplored and a clear framework for studying and addressing major dimensions is lacking. Methods: Comprised of seven clinical genomic research projects, the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research consortium (CSER) presented opportunities to examine access to genomic medicine across diverse contexts. CSER emphasized engaging historically underrepresented and/or underserved populations. We used descriptive analysis of CSER participant survey data and qualitative case studies to explore anticipated and encountered access barriers and interventions to address them. Results: CSER’s enrolled population was largely lower income and racially and ethnically diverse, with many Spanish-preferring individuals. In surveys, less than a fifth (18.7%) of participants reported experiencing barriers to care. However, CSER project case studies revealed a more nuanced picture that highlighted the blurred boundary between access to genomic research and clinical care. Drawing on insights from CSER, we build on an existing framework to characterize the concept and dimensions of access to genomic medicine along with associated measures and improvement strategies. Conclusions: Our findings support adopting a broad conceptualization of access to care encompassing multiple dimensions, using mixed methods to study access issues, and investing in innovative improvement strategies. This conceptualization may inform clinical translation of other cutting-edge technologies and contribute to the promotion of equitable, effective, and efficient access to genomic medicine.
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Prior to integration into clinical care, a novel medical innovation is typically assessed in terms of its balance of benefits and risks, often referred to as utility. Members of multidisciplinary research teams may conceptualize and assess utility in different ways, which has implications within the translational genomics community and for the evidence base upon which clinical guidelines groups and healthcare payers make decisions. Ambiguity in the conceptualization of utility in translational genomics research can lead to communication challenges within research teams and to study designs that do not meet stakeholder needs. We seek to address the ambiguity challenge by describing the conceptual understanding of utility and use of the term by scholars in the fields of philosophy, medicine, and the social sciences of decision psychology and health economics. We illustrate applications of each field's orientation to translational genomics research by using examples from the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, and we provide recommendations for increasing clarity and cohesion in future research. Given that different understandings of utility will align to a greater or lesser degree with important stakeholders' views, more precise use of the term can help researchers to better integrate multidisciplinary investigations and communicate with stakeholders.
Collapse
|
18
|
Smith HS, Morain SR, Robinson JO, Canfield I, Malek J, Rubanovich CK, Bloss CS, Ackerman SL, Biesecker B, Brothers KB, Goytia CN, Horowitz CR, Knight SJ, Koenig B, Kraft SA, Outram S, Rini C, Shipman KJ, Waltz M, Wilfond B, McGuire AL. Perceived Utility of Genomic Sequencing: Qualitative Analysis and Synthesis of a Conceptual Model to Inform Patient-Centered Instrument Development. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 15:317-328. [PMID: 34658003 PMCID: PMC9013723 DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00558-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Successful clinical integration of genomic sequencing (GS) requires evidence of its utility. While GS potentially has benefits (utilities) or harms (disutilities) across multiple domains of life for both patients and their families, there is as yet no empirically informed conceptual model of these effects. Our objective was to develop an empirically informed conceptual model of perceived utility of GS that captures utilities and disutilities for patients and their families across diverse backgrounds. METHODS We took a patient-centered approach, in which we began with a review of existing literature followed by collection of primary interview data. We conducted semi-structured interviews to explore types of utility in a clinically and sociopolitically diverse sample of 60 adults from seven Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium projects. Interviewees had either personally received, or were parents of a child who had received, GS results. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Findings from interviews were integrated with existing literature on clinical and personal utility to form the basis of an initial conceptual model that was refined based on expert review and feedback. RESULTS Five key utility types that have been previously identified in qualitative literature held up as primary domains of utility and disutility in our diverse sample. Interview data were used to specify and organize subdomains of an initial conceptual model. After expert refinement, the five primary domains included in the final model are clinical, emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and social, and several subdomains are specified within each. CONCLUSION We present an empirically informed conceptual model of perceived utility of GS. This model can be used to guide development of instruments for patient-centered outcome measurement that capture the range of relevant utilities and disutilities and inform clinical implementation of GS.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hadley Stevens Smith
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
| | - Stephanie R Morain
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.,Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jill Oliver Robinson
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Isabel Canfield
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Janet Malek
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Caryn Kseniya Rubanovich
- San Diego State University/University of California San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Psychology, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Cinnamon S Bloss
- Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA
| | - Sara L Ackerman
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | | | - Kyle B Brothers
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA
| | - Crispin N Goytia
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Carol R Horowitz
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.,Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, Institute for Health Equity Research, New York, NY, USA
| | - Sara J Knight
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Barbara Koenig
- Program in Bioethics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Stephanie A Kraft
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children's Research Institute and Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of Bioethics and Palliative Care, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Simon Outram
- Program in Bioethics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA
| | - Christine Rini
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.,Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Kelly J Shipman
- Palliative Care and Resilience Lab, Seattle Children's, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Margaret Waltz
- Department of Social Medicine, UNC-Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Benjamin Wilfond
- Treuman Katz Center for Pediatric Bioethics, Seattle Children's Research Institute and Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA.,Division of Bioethics and Palliative Care, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Amy L McGuire
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Tuteja S, Salloum RG, Elchynski AL, Smith DM, Rowe E, Blake KV, Limdi NA, Aquilante CL, Bates J, Beitelshees AL, Cipriani A, Duong BQ, Empey PE, Formea CM, Hicks JK, Mroz P, Oslin D, Pasternak AL, Petry N, Ramsey LB, Schlichte A, Swain SM, Ward KM, Wiisanen K, Skaar TC, Van Driest SL, Cavallari LH, Bishop JR. Multisite evaluation of institutional processes and implementation determinants for pharmacogenetic testing to guide antidepressant therapy. Clin Transl Sci 2021; 15:371-383. [PMID: 34562070 PMCID: PMC8841452 DOI: 10.1111/cts.13154] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2021] [Revised: 08/11/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
There is growing interest in utilizing pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, but there is lack of clarity on how to implement testing into clinical practice. We administered two surveys at 17 sites that had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. Survey 1 collected data on the process and logistics of testing. Survey 2 asked sites to rank the importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs using best‐worst scaling choice experiments. Of the 17 sites, 13 had implemented testing and four were in the planning stage. Thirteen offered testing in the outpatient setting, and nine in both outpatient/inpatient settings. PGx tests were mainly ordered by psychiatry (92%) and primary care (69%) providers. CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 were the most commonly tested genes. The justification for antidepressants selected for PGx guidance was based on Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines (94%) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA; 75.6%) guidance. Both institutional (53%) and commercial laboratories (53%) were used for testing. Sites varied on the methods for returning results to providers and patients. Sites were consistent in ranking CFIR constructs and identified patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and the identification of champions as most important for implementation. Sites deployed similar implementation strategies and measured similar outcomes. The process of implementing PGx testing to guide antidepressant therapy varied across sites, but key drivers for successful implementation were similar and may help guide other institutions interested in providing PGx‐guided pharmacotherapy for antidepressant management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sony Tuteja
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Ramzi G Salloum
- University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| | | | - D Max Smith
- MedStar Health, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Elizabeth Rowe
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| | | | - Nita A Limdi
- University of Alabama School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama, USA
| | | | - Jill Bates
- Durham VA Healthcare System, Durham, North Carolina, USA
| | | | - Amber Cipriani
- University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| | | | - Philip E Empey
- University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | | | | | - Pawel Mroz
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - David Oslin
- University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.,Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Amy L Pasternak
- University of Michigan College of Pharmacy, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Natasha Petry
- North Dakota State University/Sanford Health, Fargo, North Dakota, USA
| | - Laura B Ramsey
- Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | | | - Sandra M Swain
- MedStar Health, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kristen M Ward
- University of Michigan College of Pharmacy, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Kristin Wiisanen
- University of Florida College of Pharmacy, Gainesville, Florida, USA
| | - Todd C Skaar
- Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
| | | | | | - Jeffrey R Bishop
- University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.,University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Saikia SJ, Nirmala SR. Identification of disease genes and assessment of eye-related diseases caused by disease genes using JMFC and GDLNN. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2021; 25:359-370. [PMID: 34384296 DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2021.1955358] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
Early detection of disease genes helps humans to recover from certain gene-related diseases, like genetic eye diseases. This work identifies the possibility of eye diseasesfor the disease genes utilizing a Gaussian-activation function (G)-centric deeplearning neural network (GDLNN) model. In this work, human genes are selected by computing structural similarity and genes are clustered as disease genesand normal genes by using the JMFC clustering algorithm. Levy flight and Crossover and Mutation (LCM) centric Chicken Swarm Optimization (LCM-CSO) is employed for feature selection and GDLNN classifies the eye-related diseases for the input genes using the selected features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samar Jyoti Saikia
- Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Gauhati University, Guwahati, Assam, India.,Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Assam Don Bosco University, Guwahati, Assam, India
| | - S R Nirmala
- Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, Gauhati University, Guwahati, Assam, India.,School of Electronics and Communication Engineering, KLE Technological University, Hubli, Karnataka, India
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Raymond MB, Cooper KE, Parker LS, Bonham VL. Practices and Attitudes toward Returning Genomic Research Results to Low-Resource Research Participants. Public Health Genomics 2021; 24:241-252. [PMID: 34229325 DOI: 10.1159/000516782] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2020] [Accepted: 04/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Many research programs are challenged to accommodate low-resource research participants' (LRRP) ancillary care needs when returning genomic research results. We define LRRP as those who are low income, uninsured, underinsured, or facing barriers to act upon the results returned. This study evaluates current policies and practices surrounding return of results (RoR) to LRRP, as well as the attitudes of investigators toward providing ancillary care to LRRP. METHODS A semi-structured interview study was conducted with representatives of 35 genomic research programs nationwide. Eligible programs were returning, or planning to return, medically actionable genomic results to participants. RESULTS Three content categories emerged from this study, including: (1) RoR structures, (2) barriers to RoR to LRRP, and (3) solutions to meet community and LRRP needs. Three major structures of RoR emerged: (1) RoR Embedded in Clinical Care, (2) RoR Independent of Clinical Care, and (3) Reliance on Clinical Partnerships to Facilitate RoR. Inadequacy of program resources to address the needs of LRRP was commonly considered a significant obstacle. The attitudes and views of informants regarding responsibility to provide ancillary care for LRRP receiving genomic results were highly varied. Some informants believed that genomic sequencing and testing was not a priority for LRRP because of other pressing issues in their lives, such as housing and food insecurity. Research programs differ regarding whether clinical and social support for LRRP is considered within the purview of the research team. Some programs instituted accommodations for LRRP, including social work referral and insurance enrollment assistance. CONCLUSION Support to access downstream treatment is not readily available for LRRP in many genomic research programs. Development of best practices and policies for managing RoR to LRRP is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan B Raymond
- Social and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.,University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Kayla E Cooper
- Social and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| | - Lisa S Parker
- University of Pittsburgh, Center for Bioethics & Health Law, Human Genetics, Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Vence L Bonham
- Social and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Gardner B, Doose M, Sanchez JI, Freedman AN, de Moor JS. Distribution of Genomic Testing Resources by Oncology Practice and Rurality: A Nationally Representative Study. JCO Precis Oncol 2021; 5:PO.21.00109. [PMID: 34568717 PMCID: PMC8457818 DOI: 10.1200/po.21.00109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2021] [Revised: 05/04/2021] [Accepted: 05/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Oncologists are increasingly using molecular profiling to inform personalized patient treatment decisions. Despite its promising utility, the integration of genomic testing into diverse clinical health care settings across geographic settings has been understudied. METHODS We used data from the National Survey of Precision Medicine in Cancer Treatment, a nationally representative sample of practicing US oncologists, to assess the availability of six genomic testing resources, including on-site pathology, contracts with outside laboratories, on-site genetic counselors, internal policies or protocols for using genomic and biomarker testing, electronic medical record alerts, and genomic or molecular tumor boards. We used multivariate logistic regression models to examine differences in the availability of each genomic testing resource by practice type and rurality while adjusting for payer mix and patient volume. RESULTS A larger proportion of multispecialty group and academic practices had genomic testing resources available compared with solo and nonacademic practices. Electronic medical record alerts were the least available resource, whereas contracts with outside laboratories were the most available resource. Compared with urban practices, there were significantly fewer practices located in rural areas that had on-site pathology, on-site genetic counselors, protocols for genomic tests, and molecular tumor boards. CONCLUSION Genomic testing resources varied by practice type and geography among a nationally representative sample of practicing oncologists. This variation has important implications for the development of interventions and policies to support the more equitable delivery of precision oncology to patients with cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brittany Gardner
- Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Michelle Doose
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Janeth I. Sanchez
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Andrew N. Freedman
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| | - Janet S. de Moor
- Healthcare Delivery Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Staley BS, Milko LV, Waltz M, Griesemer I, Mollison L, Grant TL, Farnan L, Roche M, Navas A, Lightfoot A, Foreman AKM, O'Daniel JM, O'Neill SC, Lin FC, Roman TS, Brandt A, Powell BC, Rini C, Berg JS, Bensen JT. Evaluating the clinical utility of early exome sequencing in diverse pediatric outpatient populations in the North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation of Next-generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) 2 study: a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2021; 22:395. [PMID: 34127041 PMCID: PMC8201439 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05341-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2021] [Accepted: 05/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Exome sequencing (ES) has probable utility for shortening the diagnostic odyssey of children with suspected genetic disorders. This report describes the design and methods of a study evaluating the potential of ES as a routine clinical tool for pediatric patients who have suspected genetic conditions and who are in the early stages of the diagnostic odyssey. METHODS The North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-generation Exome Sequencing (NCGENES) 2 study is an interdisciplinary, multi-site Phase III randomized controlled trial of two interventions: educational pre-visit preparation (PVP) and offer of first-line ES. In this full-factorial design, parent-child dyads are randomly assigned to one of four study arms (PVP + usual care, ES + usual care, PVP + ES + usual care, or usual care alone) in equal proportions. Participants are recruited from Pediatric Genetics or Neurology outpatient clinics in three North Carolina healthcare facilities. Eligible pediatric participants are < 16 years old and have a first visit to a participating clinic, a suspected genetic condition, and an eligible parent/guardian to attend the clinic visit and complete study measures. The study oversamples participants from underserved and under-represented populations. Participants assigned to the PVP arms receive an educational booklet and question prompt list before clinical interactions. Randomization to offer of first-line ES is revealed after a child's clinic visit. Parents complete measures at baseline, pre-clinic, post-clinic, and two follow-up timepoints. Study clinicians provide phenotypic data and complete measures after the clinic visit and after returning results. Reportable study-related research ES results are confirmed in a CLIA-certified clinical laboratory. Results are disclosed to the parent by the clinical team. A community consultation team contributed to the development of study materials and study implementation methods and remains engaged in the project. DISCUSSION NCGENES 2 will contribute valuable knowledge concerning technical, clinical, psychosocial, and health economic issues associated with using early diagnostic ES to shorten the diagnostic odyssey of pediatric patients with likely genetic conditions. Results will inform efforts to engage diverse populations in genomic medicine research and generate evidence that can inform policy, practice, and future research related to the utility of first-line diagnostic ES in health care. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03548779 . Registered on June 07, 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brooke S Staley
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box #7295, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7295, USA.
| | - Laura V Milko
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Margaret Waltz
- Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Ida Griesemer
- Department of Heath Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
- Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Lonna Mollison
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Tracey L Grant
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Laura Farnan
- Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Myra Roche
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
- Department of Pediatrics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Angelo Navas
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Alexandra Lightfoot
- Department of Heath Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
- Center for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Ann Katherine M Foreman
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Julianne M O'Daniel
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Suzanne C O'Neill
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, 20007, USA
| | - Feng-Chang Lin
- Department of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Tamara S Roman
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Alicia Brandt
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Bradford C Powell
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Christine Rini
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jonathan S Berg
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA
| | - Jeannette T Bensen
- Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Campus Box #7295, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7295, USA
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Chiara M, Mandreoli P, Tangaro MA, D'Erchia AM, Sorrentino S, Forleo C, Horner DS, Zambelli F, Pesole G. VINYL: Variant prIoritizatioN by survivaL analysis. Bioinformatics 2020; 36:5590-5599. [PMID: 33367501 DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa1067] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2020] [Revised: 10/31/2020] [Accepted: 12/14/2020] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
MOTIVATION Clinical applications of genome re-sequencing technologies typically generate large amounts of data that need to be carefully annotated and interpreted to identify genetic variants potentially associated with pathological conditions. In this context, accurate and reproducible methods for the functional annotation and prioritization of genetic variants are of fundamental importance. RESULTS In this paper, we present VINYL, a flexible and fully automated system for the functional annotation and prioritization of genetic variants. Extensive analyses of both real and simulated datasets suggest that VINYL can identify clinically relevant genetic variants in a more accurate manner compared to equivalent state of the art methods, allowing a more rapid and effective prioritization of genetic variants in different experimental settings. As such we believe that VINYL can establish itself as a valuable tool to assist healthcare operators and researchers in clinical genomics investigations. AVAILABILITY VINYL is available at http://beaconlab.it/VINYL and https://github.com/matteo14c/VINYL. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo Chiara
- Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.,Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy
| | | | - Marco Antonio Tangaro
- Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy
| | - Anna Maria D'Erchia
- Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy.,Department of Biosciences, Biotechnology and Biopharmaceutics, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy
| | - Sandro Sorrentino
- Cardiology Unit, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy
| | - Cinzia Forleo
- Cardiology Unit, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy
| | - David S Horner
- Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.,Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy
| | - Federico Zambelli
- Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.,Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy
| | - Graziano Pesole
- Institute of Biomembranes, Bioenergetics and Molecular Biotechnologies, National Research Council, Bari, Italy.,Department of Biosciences, Biotechnology and Biopharmaceutics, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Bari, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Redlinger-Grosse K, MacFarlane IM, Cragun D, Zierhut H. A Delphi study to prioritize genetic counseling outcomes: What matters most. J Genet Couns 2020; 30:676-692. [PMID: 33179357 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1352] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2019] [Revised: 09/28/2020] [Accepted: 10/01/2020] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Research on genetic counseling outcomes has examined a range of metrics many that differ in quality and extent of psychometric assessment and in some cases fail to encompass potential benefits of genetic counseling for patients. Although a variety of possible outcomes have been explored, selecting the most important or relevant outcomes and identifying well-validated measures remain challenging. An online, modified Delphi method was used to prioritize genetic counseling outcomes from the viewpoint of individuals from four stakeholder groups - clinical genetic counselors, outcome researchers, genetic counseling training directors, and genetic counseling consumers/advocates. A survey of 181 genetic counseling outcomes were rated based on perceived importance and then sorted and categorized using the Framework for Outcomes of Clinical Communication Services in Genetic Counseling (FOCUS-GC) framework. Three of the FOCUS-GC domains (Process, Patient Care Experience, and Patient Changes) were assessed as most important, while none of the most highly rated outcomes fell into the domains of Patient Health or Family Changes. The majority of outcomes deemed most important by stakeholder groups were within the process domain. When looking at the proportion of outcomes that overlapped with the consumer group, clinical genetic counselors had the highest degree of similarity with consumers when looking at the high relative importance band outcomes (61.1% overlap), followed by training directors (58.3%), and outcome researchers (41.7%). Variability in importance according to stakeholder groups was an important consideration and prioritizing outcomes was challenging given that the majority of outcomes were rated as important. Working to bridge the realities of clinical care and fundamental differences in the viewpoints and priorities of genetic counseling research directions is an area for future exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Heather Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, Institute of Human Genetics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Evaluating Research Centers in Minority Institutions: Framework, Metrics, Best Practices, and Challenges. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 17:ijerph17228373. [PMID: 33198272 PMCID: PMC7696594 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17228373] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2020] [Revised: 11/02/2020] [Accepted: 11/10/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
The NIH-funded Research Centers in Minority Institutions (RCMI) program is currently funding 18 academic institutions to strengthen the research environment and contribution to health disparities research. The purpose of this multiphase mixed-methods study was to establish a uniform evaluation framework for demonstrating the collective success of this research consortium. Methods included discussions of aims and logic models at the RCMI Evaluators' Workshop, a literature review to inform an evaluation conceptual framework, and a case study survey to obtain evaluation-related information and metrics. Ten RCMIs participated in the workshop and 14 submitted responses to the survey. The resultant RCMI Evaluation Conceptual Model presents a practical ongoing approach to document RCMIs' impacts on health disparities. Survey results identified 37 common metrics under four primary categories. Evaluation challenges were issues related to limited human resources, data collection, decision-making, defining metrics, cost-sharing, and revenue-generation. There is a need for further collaborative efforts across RCMI sites to engage program leadership and community stakeholders in addressing the identified evaluation challenges and measurement. Program leadership should be engaged to apply the Evaluation Conceptual Framework and common metrics to allow for valid inter-institutional comparisons and consortium-wide evaluations. Stakeholders could ensure evaluation metrics are used to facilitate community impacts.
Collapse
|
27
|
Griesemer I, Staley BS, Lightfoot AF, Bain L, Byrd D, Conway C, Grant TL, Leach B, Milko L, Mollison L, Porter N, Reid S, Smith G, Waltz M, Berg JS, Rini C, O'Daniel JM. Engaging community stakeholders in research on best practices for clinical genomic sequencing. Per Med 2020; 17:435-444. [PMID: 33026293 PMCID: PMC7938705 DOI: 10.2217/pme-2020-0074] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
Aim: Maximizing the utility and equity of genomic sequencing integration in clinical care requires engaging patients, their families, and communities. The NCGENES 2 study explores the impact of engagement between clinicians and caregivers of children with undiagnosed conditions in the context of a diagnostic genomic sequencing study. Methods: A Community Consult Team (CCT) of diverse parents and advocates for children with genetic and/or neurodevelopmental conditions was formed. Results: Early and consistent engagement with the CCT resulted in adaptations to study protocol and materials relevant to this unique study population. Discussion: This study demonstrates valuable contributions of community stakeholders to inform the implementation of translational genomics research for diverse participants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ida Griesemer
- Department of Health Behavior, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill NC, USA
| | - Brooke S Staley
- Department of Epidemiology, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Alexandra F Lightfoot
- Department of Health Behavior, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.,Center for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | - Derrick Byrd
- Parent/Advocate, Family Resource Center South Atlantic, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | - Carol Conway
- Parent/Advocate, Parent Advocates for Adult Children with Intellectual &/or Developmental Disabilities in NC, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Tracey L Grant
- Department of Genetics, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Barbara Leach
- Parent/Advocate, Family Support Program, School of Social Work, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Laura Milko
- Department of Genetics, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Lonna Mollison
- Department of Genetics, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | | | - Sharron Reid
- Parent/Advocate, Wake County Sickle Cell Support Group, Raleigh, NC, USA
| | | | - Margaret Waltz
- Department of Social Medicine, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Jonathan S Berg
- Department of Genetics, UNC Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| | - Christine Rini
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine & Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Talebizadeh Z, Shah A. The AutGO Initiative: A Conceptual Framework for Developing Genetics-Outcomes Research Hypotheses. Autism Res 2020; 13:1286-1299. [PMID: 32618145 PMCID: PMC7496490 DOI: 10.1002/aur.2331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2019] [Revised: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 04/27/2020] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
The increasing emphasis on translational approaches to complex neuropsychiatric and neurodevelopmental conditions research requires scientists from a broad range of disciplines to build dynamic collaborations when formulating hypotheses and framing study designs. The need to integrate the knowledge and perspectives not only from multiple scientific silos but also from the populations impacted by these conditions presents a significant challenge to researchers, particularly for a heterogeneous condition like autism. As one path toward addressing these challenges, we have previously introduced Autism Genetics Outcomes (AutGO), an initiative to support broad stakeholder partnerships and promote a new integrated concept called GO (i.e., research approaches that draw on both genetics and clinical outcomes perspectives). Herein, we developed a workflow for collecting stakeholders' feedback toward the development of a GO hypothesis. AutGO is an evolving initiative, and here we describe how its three essential components (conceptual framework, applicability, and implementation) have been developed. As a proof‐of‐concept, the AutGO team sought to demonstrate how a GO hypothesis could be developed using a semi‐structured literature review workflow. We also developed a prototype from published reports and formulated a GO hypothesis for autism. Rather than seeking community stakeholder input after a research project is conceptualized and designed, the developed conceptual framework demonstrates the feasibility of formulating scientific hypotheses by engaging stakeholders in retrospective semi‐structured literature reviews. The presented workflow, prototype, and discussed recommendations will bring awareness in the autism research community about the benefits of applying the GO approach in order to promote translational aspects in genetics research. Lay Summary We used a community‐based engagement approach to develop AutGO (Autism Genetics Outcomes), an initiative to establish stakeholder partnerships and to promote research approaches (we refer to as GO) that draw on both genetics and clinical outcomes perspectives. Specifically, we developed a conceptual framework that includes a literature review process for developing GO hypotheses and stakeholder feedback collection protocol. Our work will bring awareness in the autism research community about the benefits of integrating patient perspectives in genetics research. Autism Res 2020, 13: 1286–1299. © 2020 The Authors. Autism Research published by International Society for Autism Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zohreh Talebizadeh
- Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, MO, USA.,University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, Kansas City, MO, USA
| | - Ayten Shah
- Children's Mercy Hospital, Kansas City, MO, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Returning genomic results in a Federally Qualified Health Center: the intersection of precision medicine and social determinants of health. Genet Med 2020; 22:1552-1559. [PMID: 32371921 PMCID: PMC7483616 DOI: 10.1038/s41436-020-0806-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2019] [Revised: 03/05/2020] [Accepted: 04/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose: This report describes the return of sequencing results to low-income Latino participants recruited through a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC). We describe challenges in returning research results secondary to social determinants of health and present lessons learned to guide future genomic medicine implementation studies in low resource settings. Methods: 500 Latino adults (76% women) consented to research sequencing for a predetermined panel of actionable genes. Providers and staff from the FQHC were engaged to align processes with the practice and a Community Advisory Board grounded the project in the local community. Results: A pathogenic/likely pathogenic variant was present in 10 participants (2%). Challenges in return of results included the time lag (582±53 days) between enrollment and returning actionable results, difficulty reaching participants, missed appointments, low health literacy, lack of health insurance, and reconciling results with limited information on family history. Return of one actionable result was deferred due to acute emotional distress secondary to recent traumatic life events. Conclusion: The social determinants of health influence the implementation of genomic medicine in low-income populations in low-resource settings. Considering non-biological factors that contribute to disparities will be necessary to better appreciate how genomic medicine may fit within the context of health equity.
Collapse
|
30
|
Goddard KA, Angelo FA, Ackerman SL, Berg JS, Biesecker BB, Danila MI, East KM, Hindorff LA, Horowitz CR, Hunter JE, Joseph G, Knight SJ, McGuire A, Muessig KR, Ou J, Outram S, Rahn EJ, Ramos MA, Rini C, Robinson JO, Smith HS, Waltz M, Lee SSJ. Lessons learned about harmonizing survey measures for the CSER consortium. J Clin Transl Sci 2020; 4:537-546. [PMID: 33948230 PMCID: PMC8057449 DOI: 10.1017/cts.2020.41] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2020] [Accepted: 03/05/2020] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Implementation of genome-scale sequencing in clinical care has significant challenges: the technology is highly dimensional with many kinds of potential results, results interpretation and delivery require expertise and coordination across multiple medical specialties, clinical utility may be uncertain, and there may be broader familial or societal implications beyond the individual participant. Transdisciplinary consortia and collaborative team science are well poised to address these challenges. However, understanding the complex web of organizational, institutional, physical, environmental, technologic, and other political and societal factors that influence the effectiveness of consortia is understudied. We describe our experience working in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, a multi-institutional translational genomics consortium. METHODS A key aspect of the CSER consortium was the juxtaposition of site-specific measures with the need to identify consensus measures related to clinical utility and to create a core set of harmonized measures. During this harmonization process, we sought to minimize participant burden, accommodate project-specific choices, and use validated measures that allow data sharing. RESULTS Identifying platforms to ensure swift communication between teams and management of materials and data were essential to our harmonization efforts. Funding agencies can help consortia by clarifying key study design elements across projects during the proposal preparation phase and by providing a framework for data sharing data across participating projects. CONCLUSIONS In summary, time and resources must be devoted to developing and implementing collaborative practices as preparatory work at the beginning of project timelines to improve the effectiveness of research consortia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Frank A.N. Angelo
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Sara L. Ackerman
- Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Jonathan S. Berg
- Department of Genetics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA
| | | | - Maria I. Danila
- Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Kelly M. East
- HudsonAlpha Institute for Biotechnology, Huntsville, AL, USA
| | | | - Carol R. Horowitz
- Department of Medicine, General Internal Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | | | - Galen Joseph
- Department of Anthropology, History, and Social Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Sara J. Knight
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
| | - Amy McGuire
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Kristin R. Muessig
- Center for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Northwest, Portland, OR, USA
| | - Jeffrey Ou
- Department of Medicine, Division of Medical Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Simon Outram
- Program in Bioethics, University of California, San Francisco, USA
| | - Elizabeth J. Rahn
- Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA
| | - Michelle A. Ramos
- Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Christine Rini
- Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA
- Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA
| | - Jill O. Robinson
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Hadley Stevens Smith
- Center for Medical Ethics and Health Policy at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Margaret Waltz
- Department of Social Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, USA
| | - Sandra Soo-Jin Lee
- Division of Ethics, Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
Nisselle A, Martyn M, Jordan H, Kaunein N, McEwen A, Patel C, Terrill B, Bishop M, Metcalfe S, Gaff C. Ensuring Best Practice in Genomic Education and Evaluation: A Program Logic Approach. Front Genet 2019; 10:1057. [PMID: 31781158 PMCID: PMC6857516 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2019.01057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2019] [Accepted: 10/02/2019] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Targeted genomic education and training of professionals have been identified as core components of strategies and implementation plans for the use of genomics in health care systems. Education needs to be effective and support the sustained and appropriate use of genomics in health care. Evaluation of education programs to identify effectiveness is challenging. Furthermore, those responsible for development and delivery are not necessarily trained in education and/or evaluation. Program logic models have been used to support the development and evaluation of education programs by articulating a logical explanation as to how a program intends to produce the desired outcomes. These are highly relevant to genomic education programs, but do not appear to have been widely used to date. To assist those developing and evaluating genomic education programs, and as a first step towards enabling identification of effective genomic education approaches, we developed a consensus program logic model for genomic education. We drew on existing literature and a co-design process with 24 international genomic education and evaluation experts to develop the model. The general applicability of the model to the development of programs was tested by program convenors across four diverse settings. Conveners reported on the utility and relevance of the logic model across development, delivery and evaluation. As a whole, their feedback suggests that the model is flexible and adaptive across university award programs, competency development and continuing professional development activities. We discuss this program logic model as a potential best practice mechanism for developing genomic education, and to support development of an evaluation framework and consistent standards to evaluate and report genomic education program outcomes and impacts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy Nisselle
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Melissa Martyn
- Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Melbourne Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Helen Jordan
- Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Nadia Kaunein
- Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Alison McEwen
- Graduate School of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Chirag Patel
- Genetic Health Queensland, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Bronwyn Terrill
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Kinghorn Centre for Clinical Genomics, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,St Vincent's Clinical School, University of New South Wales Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Michelle Bishop
- Genomics Education Program, Health Education England, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Sylvia Metcalfe
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Clara Gaff
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Genomics in Society, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.,Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|