Media Coverage of Ethical Issues in Predictive Genetic Testing: A Qualitative Analysis

Ciencia, Genética, y ¿Desinformación?: A content analysis of genetic testing coverage from US Spanish-language news media

Genetic testing (GT) has become ubiquitous in the United States, either in clinical or direct-to-consumer markets. White and English-speaking populations have primarily benefited from this new technology, leaving other groups, like Hispanic populations, behind. Explanations for this disparity has cited a lack of awareness and knowledge of genetic testing purposes. Science communication from English-language media play an important role in setting initial attitudes and influencing decision-making for audiences. However, Spanish-language media have virtually no research published on documented potential effects for GT utilization despite the continued growth of Hispanic Spanish-speaking groups in the United States. Thus, this study characterized coverage of GT from two of the most prominent US Spanish-language media outlets, Telemundo and Univision. Over a 12-year time period, we identified 235 written articles of GT, mainly focusing on forensics applications, followed by gossip and health. There were 292 sources referenced across all 235 articles drawing from governmental agencies or officials, other news agencies, and medical institutions or officials. The findings suggest that coverage of GT among Spanish-language news outlets is limited. When Spanish-language news outlets do cover GT, they focus on aspects of intrigue or entertainment more than demystifying and explaining GT. Stories tend to cite other published articles, with author attribution often missing, leading to questions of comfort of Spanish-media to cover these topics. Further, the publishing process may lead to confusion of the purpose of genetic testing for health purposes and may bias Spanish-speaking groups towards genetic testing for health purposes. Thus, reconciliation and education initiatives around genetic testing purposes are needed for Spanish-speaking communities from not only media, but also genetics providers and institutions.

Scientific clickbait: Examining media coverage and readability in genome-wide association research

In the present study, we analyzed a large corpus of English-language online media articles covering genome-wide association studies (GWAS), exemplifying the use of computational methods to study science communication in biological sciences. We analyzed trends in media coverage, readability, themes, and mentions of ethical and social issues, in over 5,000 websites published from 2005 to 2018 from 3,555 GWAS publications on 1,943 different traits, identified via GWAS Catalog using a text-mining approach to inform the discussion about genetic literacy and media coverage. We found that 22.9% of GWAS papers received media attention but most were described in language too complex to be understood by the public. Ethical issues are rarely mentioned and mentions of translation are increasing over time. We predicted media attention based on year of publication, number of genetic associations identified, study sample size, and journal impact factor, using a regression model (r2 = 38.7%). We found that chronotype, educational attainment, alcohol and coffee consumption, sexual orientation, tanning, and hair color received substantially more attention than predicted by the regression model. We also evaluated the prevalence of the clickbait "one gene, one disease" headlines (e.g., "Scientists Say They've Found Gene That Causes Breast Cancer") and found that it is declining. In sum, online media coverage of GWAS should be more accessible, introduce more modern genetics terms, and when appropriate, ELSI should be mentioned. Science communication research can benefit from big data and text-mining techniques which allow us to study trends and changes in coverage trends across thousands of media outlets. Results can be explored interactively in a website we have built for this manuscript: https://jjmorosoli.shinyapps.io/newas/.

Ethical questions concerning newborn genetic screening

Newborn screening is a public health strategy used to identify certain diseases in the first days of life and, therefore, facilitate early treatment before the onset of symptoms. The decision of which diseases should be included in a screening goes beyond the medical perspective, including reasons for public health and health economics. There are a number of characteristics to include a disease in the screening, such as that the disorder must be a significant health problem, the natural history of the disease must be well known, a feasible and accurate test must be available, there must be a treatment that is most effective when applied before the onset of clinical symptoms and a health system must be in place that is capable of performing the procedure and subsequent monitoring. Currently, newborn screening programs are currently based on the use of biochemical markers that detect metabolites, hormones or proteins, but recently, the availability of new technology has allowed the possibility of a genetic screening. In addition to technical problems, the possibility of neonatal screening also presents a number of ethical problems. We identified and discussed six areas of particular concern: type of illness, overdiagnosis or overtreatment, information management and informed consent, data confidentiality and protection, justice and legal regulation.

'There is a lot of good in knowing, but there is also a lot of downs': public views on ethical considerations in population genomic screening

Publics are key stakeholders in population genomic screening and their perspectives on ethical considerations are relevant to programme design and policy making. Using semi-structured interviews, we explored social views and attitudes towards possible future provision of personalised genomic risk information to populations to inform prevention and/or early detection of relevant conditions. Participants were members of the public (n=30) who had received information on their personal genomic risk of melanoma as part of a research project. The focus of the analysis presented here is participants' views regarding ethical considerations relevant to population genomic screening more generally. Data were analysed thematically and four key themes related to ethical considerations were identified: (i) personal responsibility for health: 'forewarned is forearmed'; (ii) perceptions of, and responses to, genetic fatalism; (iii) implications for parenting and reproduction; (iv) divided views on choosing to receive genomic risk information. Ethical considerations underlying these themes include the valorisation of information and choice, paternalism, non-directiveness and increasing responsibilisation of individuals in health and healthcare. These findings arguably indicate a thin public conceptualisation of population genomic testing, which draws heavily on how these themes tend to be described in existing social discourses. Findings suggest that further public engagement is required to increase complexity of debate, to consider (for example) the appropriate place of individual and social interests in population genomic testing. Further discernment of relevant ethical approaches, drawing on ethical frameworks from both public health and clinical settings, will also assist in determining the appropriate implementation of population genomic screening for complex conditions.