Attitudes toward direct-to-consumer advertisements and online genetic testing among high-risk women participating in a hereditary cancer clinic

The Landscape of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing in Reproductive Health Contexts: An Analytical Framework of Stakeholders and Their Competing Motivations

We propose a theoretical framework that identifies (a) the different categories of stakeholders and (b) the normative values that drive their attitudes toward direct-to-consumer genetic testing, with an emphasis on the reproductive health contexts. We conducted a literature search using varied combinations of search terms, including direct-to-consumer genetic testing, decision-making, reproductive health, and policy. Using a grounded theory approach to existing literature and in combination with a narrative review, we present a systematic framework of five categories of stakeholders (i.e., genome-driven stakeholders, industry-driven stakeholders, history-driven stakeholders, value-driven stakeholders, and social justice-driven stakeholders) that shape the public's discourse. Moving beyond the dialectical ethics that have governed the public discourse, we also identify the normative values and interests that motivate different stakeholders' attitudes and decision-making through theoretical sampling under the grounded theory. We investigate the competing and conflicting values within the same category of stakeholders. For example, despite being industry-driven stakeholders, medical professionals' attitudes are driven by concerns about standards of care; in contrast, health insurance companies' concerns are centered on profit. We further explore the tensions between these stakeholders that impact their strategic alliances and pose challenges to the practices of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Finally, we examine how these stakeholders and their corresponding values may shape future development and policies of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the context of reproductive health.

'It's much more grey than black and white': clinical geneticists' views on the oversight of consumer genomics in Europe

Aim: Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests (GT) have created controversy regarding their risks and benefits. In view of recent regulatory developments, this article aims to explore the attitudes of European clinical geneticists toward the oversight of DTC GT. Materials & methods: Fifteen semi-structured interviews were performed with clinical geneticists based in ten European countries. The transcripts were thematically analysized in an iterative process. Results & conclusion: Respondents strongly supported quality standards for DTC GT equal to those applied within the healthcare setting. Despite participants unanimously considering the involvement of healthcare professionals to be important, mandatory medical supervision was controversial. In this regard, promoting education and truth-in-advertising was considered as being key in maintaining a balance between protecting consumers and promoting their autonomy.

Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review

Background

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GT) are easily purchased through the Internet, independent of a physician referral or approval for testing, allowing the retrieval of genetic information outside the clinical context. There is a broad debate about the testing validity, their impact on individuals, and what people know and perceive about them.

Objective

The aim of this review was to collect evidence on DTC-GT from a comprehensive perspective that unravels the complexity of the phenomenon.

Methods

A systematic search was carried out through PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Embase, in addition to Google Scholar according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist with the key term “Direct-to-consumer genetic test.”

Results

In the final sample, 118 articles were identified. Articles were summarized in five categories according to their focus on (1) knowledge of, attitude toward use of, and perception of DTC-GT (n=37), (2) the impact of genetic risk information on users (n=37), (3) the opinion of health professionals (n=20), (4) the content of websites selling DTC-GT (n=16), and (5) the scientific evidence and clinical utility of the tests (n=14). Most of the articles analyzed the attitude, knowledge, and perception of DTC-GT, highlighting an interest in using DTC-GT, along with the need for a health care professional to help interpret the results. The articles investigating the content analysis of the websites selling these tests are in agreement that the information provided by the companies about genetic testing is not completely comprehensive for the consumer. Given that risk information can modify consumers’ health behavior, there are surprisingly few studies carried out on actual consumers and they do not confirm the overall concerns on the possible impact of DTC-GT. Data from studies that investigate the quality of the tests offered confirm that they are not informative, have little predictive power, and do not measure genetic risk appropriately.

Conclusions

The impact of DTC-GT on consumers’ health perceptions and behaviors is an emerging concern. However, negative effects on consumers or health benefits have yet to be observed. Nevertheless, since the online market of DTC-GT is expected to grow, it is important to remain aware of a possible impact.

Promoting healthy dietary behaviour through personalised nutrition: technology push or technology pull?

The notion of educating the public through generic healthy eating messages has pervaded dietary health promotion efforts over the years and continues to do so through various media, despite little evidence for any enduring impact upon eating behaviour. There is growing evidence, however, that tailored interventions such as those that could be delivered online can be effective in bringing about healthy dietary behaviour change. The present paper brings together evidence from qualitative and quantitative studies that have considered the public perspective of genomics, nutrigenomics and personalised nutrition, including those conducted as part of the EU-funded Food4Me project. Such studies have consistently indicated that although the public hold positive views about nutrigenomics and personalised nutrition, they have reservations about the service providers' ability to ensure the secure handling of health data. Technological innovation has driven the concept of personalised nutrition forward and now a further technological leap is required to ensure the privacy of online service delivery systems and to protect data gathered in the process of designing personalised nutrition therapies.

Factors associated with the persuasiveness of direct-to-consumer advertising on HPV vaccination among young women

This quantitative study explored young women's response to direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising (DTCA) for a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. In particular, the study examined (a) the association of factors stemming from consumer research with actual and intended behavioral responses to DTCA for HPV and (b) key elements drawn from commonly used health-related theories to determine the strongest associations with behavioral intentions regarding the HPV vaccine. Survey findings showed that vaccinated women indicated that DTCA played a role in their decision to get vaccinated against HPV more so than those who were not vaccinated. Trust in DTCA for an HPV vaccine brand was significantly related to intentions to seek more information about the vaccine. Also, perceived barriers had the only significant association with behavioral intentions when taking into account perceived threat and response efficacy. These results provide practical implications for key industry decision makers and health communication professionals on the design of effective theory-based health communication message content for an HPV vaccine brand with consequent social implications.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing and Personal Genomics Services: A Review of Recent Empirical Studies

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) has sparked much controversy and undergone dramatic changes in its brief history. Debates over appropriate health policies regarding DTC-GT would benefit from empirical research on its benefits, harms, and limitations. We review the recent literature (2011-present) and summarize findings across (1) content analyses of DTC-GT websites, (2) studies of consumer perspectives and experiences, and (3) surveys of relevant health care providers. Findings suggest that neither the health benefits envisioned by DTC-GT proponents (e.g., significant improvements in positive health behaviors) nor the worst fears expressed by its critics (e.g., catastrophic psychological distress and misunderstanding of test results, undue burden on the health care system) have materialized to date. However, research in this area is in its early stages and possesses numerous key limitations. We note needs for future studies to illuminate the impact of DTC-GT and thereby guide practice and policy regarding this rapidly evolving approach to personal genomics.

Direct-to-consumer genomic testing from the perspective of the health professional: a systematic review of the literature

Since the 1990s, there has been a rapid expansion in the number and type of genetic tests available via health professionals; the last 10 years, however, have seen certain types of genetic and genomic tests available direct-to-consumer. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the topic of direct-to-consumer genetic testing from the health professional perspective. Search terms used to identify studies were 'direct-to-consumer', personal genom*, health* professional*, physician* 'genomic, genetic' in five bibliographic databases, together with citation searching. Eight quantitative papers were reviewed. Findings indicate a low level of awareness and experience of direct-to-consumer testing in health professionals. Inconsistent levels of knowledge and understanding were also found with two studies showing significant effects for gender and age. Concerns about clinical utility and lack of counselling were identified. Health professionals specialising in genetics were most likely to express concerns. There was also evidence of perceived increased workload for health professionals post-testing. However, some health professionals rated such tests clinically useful and cited benefits such as the increased opportunity for early screening. Despite limited awareness, knowledge and experience of actual cases, we concluded that the concerns and potential benefits expressed may be warranted. It may be useful to explore the attitudes and experiences of health professionals in more depth using a qualitative approach. Finally, it is essential that health professionals receive sufficient education and guidelines to equip them to help patients presenting with the results of these tests.

Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives

Genetic tests have traditionally been offered by health professionals. However, genomic tests have been available direct to the consumer for the last decade, increasingly via the Internet. The aim of this systematic review was to ascertain the evidence concerning use of direct-to-consumer genomic testing from the consumer perspective. Primary research was identified using the search terms 'direct-to-consumer' and 'genomic or genetic' in six bibliographic databases and citation searching of findings. In all, 17 papers were reviewed: 3 qualitative and 14 quantitative. Findings indicate a low level of awareness of direct-to-consumer genomic testing and, because of the hypothetical nature of many studies, little evidence from users of such tests. Although potential users appear to be interested in information about their risks of developing common diseases, concerns were expressed about privacy of genetic risk information and the reliability of genomic tests. Consumers were anxious about the nature of the results. There appeared to be a preference to access genomic tests via a health professional, or to discuss the results and obtain advice from a health professional. Authors of only two papers recruited participants who had used direct-to-consumer tests and samples from the large quantitative studies were not representative of the population. These factors limit the value of the available evidence. However, we conclude that there is public interest in direct-to-consumer genomic tests, and that this is likely to result in an increased workload for a range of health professionals. We also consider that there are educational implications for both consumers and health professionals.

Health care providers and direct-to-consumer access and advertising of genetic testing in the United States

Marketing pressures, regulatory policies, clinical guidelines, and consumer demand all affect health care providers' knowledge and use of health-related genetic tests that are sold and/or advertised to consumers. In addition, clinical guidelines, regulatory policies, and educational efforts are needed to promote the informed use of genetic tests that are sold and advertised to consumers and health care providers. A shift in culture regarding the regulation of genetic tests that are sold directly to consumers is suggested: by recent actions taken by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), including letters sent to direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies stating that their tests meet the definition of medical devices; by public meetings held by the FDA to discuss laboratory developed tests; and by the convening of the Molecular and Clinical Genetics Panel to gather input on scientific issues concerning DTC genetic tests that make medical claims. This review provides a brief overview of DTC advertising and the regulation of pharmaceuticals and genetic tests in the United States. It highlights recent changes in the regulatory culture regarding genetic tests that are sold to consumers, and discusses the impact on health care providers of selling and advertising genetic tests directly to consumers.

Young smokers' views of genetic susceptibility testing for lung cancer risk: minding unintended consequences

Assessment of smokers' responses to individualized feedback of genetic susceptibility has shown little or no influence on smoking cessation outcomes. One explanation is that smokers may be having unintended responses that undermine the feedback's motivational impact (e.g., fatalism or downplaying risk). In preparation for a large randomized trial with college smokers, we conducted a qualitative pilot study to explore smokers' motives for genetic testing and how these motives might influence interpretation of genetic risk feedback.Prior to reviewing informational materials describing a test for the glutathione S-transferase M1 gene, 33 college smokers (18 to 21 years) participated in a 30 minute, semi-structured, open-ended interview regarding their attitudes on health risks, genetic testing in general, genetic testing for lung cancer risk, and informational needs regarding genetics and genetic testing for lung cancer risk.Two central themes emerged from analysis of the interviews: general impressions of genetic testing and perceived value of genetic testing. Prominent in the second theme was the finding that genetic risk feedback may be unsuccessful in motivating quitting a) due to skepticism about genetic tests, b) participants dismissing genetic feedback as personally irrelevant, and c) participants receiving low risk results justifying continued smoking in light of public health messages that "it's never too late to quit". These findings require careful consideration among health professionals looking to genetic risk feedback as a vehicle to motivate disease prevention or behavior change.