1
|
Shen EC, Srinivasan S, Passero LE, Allen CG, Dixon M, Foss K, Halliburton B, Milko LV, Smit AK, Carlson R, Roberts MC. Barriers and Facilitators for Population Genetic Screening in Healthy Populations: A Systematic Review. Front Genet 2022; 13:865384. [PMID: 35860476 PMCID: PMC9289280 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.865384] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 06/02/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Studies suggest that 1-3% of the general population in the United States unknowingly carry a genetic risk factor for a common hereditary disease. Population genetic screening is the process of offering otherwise healthy patients in the general population testing for genomic variants that predispose them to diseases that are clinically actionable, meaning that they can be prevented or mitigated if they are detected early. Population genetic screening may significantly reduce morbidity and mortality from these diseases by informing risk-specific prevention or treatment strategies and facilitating appropriate participation in early detection. To better understand current barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to the implementation of population genetic screening, we conducted a systematic review and searched PubMed, Embase, and Scopus for articles published from date of database inception to May 2020. We included articles that 1) detailed the perspectives of participants in population genetic screening programs and 2) described the barriers, facilitators, perceptions, and outcomes related to population genetic screening programs among patients, healthcare providers, and the public. We excluded articles that 1) focused on direct-to-consumer or risk-based genetic testing and 2) were published before January 2000. Thirty articles met these criteria. Barriers and facilitators to population genetic screening were organized by the Social Ecological Model and further categorized by themes. We found that research in population genetic screening has focused on stakeholder attitudes with all included studies designed to elucidate individuals' perceptions. Additionally, inadequate knowledge and perceived limited clinical utility presented a barrier for healthcare provider uptake. There were very few studies that conducted long-term follow-up and evaluation of population genetic screening. Our findings suggest that these and other factors, such as prescreen counseling and education, may play a role in the adoption and implementation of population genetic screening. Future studies to investigate macro-level determinants, strategies to increase provider buy-in and knowledge, delivery models for prescreen counseling, and long-term outcomes of population genetic screening are needed for the effective design and implementation of such programs. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020198198.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emily C Shen
- College of Arts and Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States.,UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Swetha Srinivasan
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Lauren E Passero
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Caitlin G Allen
- Department of Public Health Science, College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States
| | - Madison Dixon
- Department of Behavioral, Social, and Health Education Science, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States
| | - Kimberly Foss
- Department of Genetics, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Brianna Halliburton
- College of Arts and Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Laura V Milko
- Department of Genetics, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Amelia K Smit
- The Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, A Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.,Melanoma Institute Australia, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Rebecca Carlson
- Health Sciences Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| | - Megan C Roberts
- Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Szakály Z, Kovács B, Szakály M, T. Nagy-Pető D, Popovics P, Kiss M. Consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary. GENES & NUTRITION 2021; 16:3. [PMID: 33648454 PMCID: PMC7923598 DOI: 10.1186/s12263-021-00683-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2020] [Accepted: 02/06/2021] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the increasing number of personalized nutrition services available on the market, nutrigenomics-based level of personalization is still the exception rather than a mainstream activity. This can be partly explained by various factors of consumer acceptance of the new technology. While consumer attitudes toward genetic tests aiming to reveal the risks of a predisposition to various illnesses have already been examined by several research studies worldwide; consumer acceptance of nutrigenomics-based personalized nutrition has only been examined by a significantly lower number of papers, especially in the Central and Eastern European region. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this paper is to examine consumer acceptance of genetic-based personalized nutrition in Hungary. Therefore a national representative survey was conducted involving 1000 individuals. The starting point of the model used is the assumption that the consumer acceptance of personalized nutrition is influenced by its consumer perceptions, which are affected by psychological processes that, in a more general sense, determine acceptance of food innovations. RESULTS The results show that 23.5% of respondents accept genetic test-based personalized nutrition. Women were found to reject the new technology in a significantly smaller proportion than men. The relationship between other demographic variables (i.e. age groups, education and subjective income level) and the perception of genetic-based personalized nutrition is also significant. Our results indicate that it is perceived cost/benefit that is most strongly related to genetically based personalized dietary preferences, followed by perceived risk and subjective norms. Perceived uncertainty and perceived behavioural control, however, have only a weak relationship with genetic-based personalized dietary preferences. CONCLUSIONS Compared with the magnitude of the effect of socio-demographic criteria, it can be concluded that, on the whole, psychological processes in the individual have a greater influence on the development of preferences for genetic-based personalized nutrition than any socio-demographic factor. This also confirms the trend that there are more and more value-added products or value propositions (where a significant part of the value added is to be found in product innovation), for which psychological characteristics are/should be given more emphasis among the segmentation criteria.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zoltán Szakály
- Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| | - Bence Kovács
- Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| | - Márk Szakály
- Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| | - Dorka T. Nagy-Pető
- Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| | - Péter Popovics
- Institute of Applied Economics Sciences, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| | - Marietta Kiss
- Institute of Marketing and Commerce, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, 4032 Hungary
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Rasmussen V, Forrest LE, Rogasik M, Girodet M, Meeus P, Sunyach MP, Blay JY, Bally O, Brahmi M, Ballinger ML, Niedermayr E, Thomas DM, Halliday J, James P, Ray-Coquard I, Young MA. A comparison of Australian and French families affected by sarcoma: perceptions of genetics and incidental findings. Per Med 2018; 15:13-24. [PMID: 29714116 DOI: 10.2217/pme-2017-0035] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
AIM To compare Australian and French perceptions of genetics and preferences regarding the return of incidental findings. METHODS Participants from the International Sarcoma Kindred Study received a survey at intake to cancer referral units. A total of 1442 Australian and 479 French individuals affected by sarcoma and their unaffected family members responded to four hypothetical scenarios depicting hereditary conditions of varying treatability and severity. RESULTS Australians' preference for the return of incidental findings was consistently higher than French for all scenarios. Country group differences were significant for two scenarios when individual characteristics were controlled through multivariable analyses. CONCLUSION Findings support the need for guidelines that are sensitive to sociocultural context and promote autonomous decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria Rasmussen
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Laura E Forrest
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Muriel Rogasik
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.,EURACAN (European network for Rare adult solid Cancer), Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Magali Girodet
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.,HESPER (Health Services and Performance Research) Lab EA 4128, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Pierre Meeus
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | | | - Jean-Yves Blay
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.,EURACAN (European network for Rare adult solid Cancer), Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Olivia Bally
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Mehdi Brahmi
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Mandy L Ballinger
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | - Eveline Niedermayr
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia
| | - David M Thomas
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | - Jane Halliday
- Public Health Genetics, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Paul James
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Isabelle Ray-Coquard
- Centre Léon Bérard, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France.,HESPER (Health Services and Performance Research) Lab EA 4128, University Lyon 1, Lyon, France
| | - Mary-Anne Young
- Parkville Familial Cancer Centre, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.,The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| | -
- The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Promoting healthy dietary behaviour through personalised nutrition: technology push or technology pull? Proc Nutr Soc 2014; 74:171-6. [PMID: 25342299 DOI: 10.1017/s0029665114001529] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|