Abstract
As the practice of medicine has become more patient-driven, patients are increasingly seeking health information within and outside of their doctor’s office. Patients looking for information and support are often turning to the Internet as well as family and friends. As part of a study to understand the impact of delivery method of genomic testing for type 2 diabetes risk on comprehension and health-related behaviors, we assessed participants’ information-seeking and sharing behaviors after receiving their results in-person with a genetic counselor or online through the testing company’s website. We found that 32.6 % of participants sought information after receiving the genomic test results for T2DM; 80.8 % of those that did seek information turned to the Internet. Eighty-eight percent of participants reported that they shared their T2DM risk results, primarily with their spouse/partner (65 %) and other family members (57 %) and children (19 %); 14 % reported sharing results with their health provider. Sharing was significantly increased in those who received results in-person from the genetic counselor (p = 0.0001). Understanding patients’ interests and needs for additional information after genomic testing and with whom they share details of their health is important as more information and clinical services are available and accessed outside the clinician’s office. Genetic counselors’ expertise and experience in creating educational materials and promoting sharing of genetic information can facilitate patient engagement and education.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahmed, O. H., Sullivan, S. J., Schneiders, A. G., & McCrory, P. R. (2012). Concussion information online: evaluation of information quality, content and readability of concussion-related websites. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 46(9), 675–683.
Arora, N. K., Hesse, B. W., Rimer, B. K., Viswanath, K., Clayman, M. L., & Croyle, R. T. (2008). Frustrated and confused: the American public rates its cancer-related information-seeking experiences. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 23(3), 223–228.
Ashida, S., Koehly, L. M., Roberts, J. S., Chen, C. A., Hiraki, S., & Green, R. C. (2010). The role of disease perceptions and results sharing in psychological adaptation after genetic susceptibility testing: the REVEAL study. European Journal of Human Genetics, 18(12), 1296–1301.
Bloss, C. S., Wineinger, N. E., Darst, B. F., Schork, N. J., & Topol, E. J. (2013). Impact of direct-to-consumer genomic testing at long term follow-up. Journal of Medical Genetics, 50(6), 393–400.
Boston, M. M., Ruwe, E., Duggins, A., & Willging, J. P. (2005). Internet use by parents of children undergoing outpatient otolaryngology procedures. Archives of Otolaryngology, 131(8), 719–722.
Caulfield, T., & McGuire, A. L. (2012). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: perceptions, problems, and policy responses. Annual Review of Medicine, 63, 23–33.
Christensen, K. D., Jayaratne, T. E., Roberts, J. S., Kardia, S. L., & Petty, E. M. (2010). Understandings of basic genetics in the United States: results from a national survey of black and white men and women. Public Health Genomics, 13(7–8), 467–476.
Darst BF, Madlensky L, Schork NJ, Topol EJ, Bloss CS (2013) Characteristics of genomic test consumers who spontaneously share results with their health care provider. Health communication
EGAPP. (2007). Recommendations from the EGAPP working group: testing for cytochrome P450 polymorphisms in adults with nonpsychotic depression treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Genetics in Medicine: Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 9(12), 819–825.
Emslie, C., Hunt, K., & Watt, G. (2003). A chip off the old block? Lay understandings of inheritance among men and women in mid-life. Public Understanding of Science, 12(1), 47–65.
Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Kuss, O., & Sa, E. R. (2002). Empirical studies assessing the quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review. JAMA : The Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(20), 2691–2700.
FDA (2013) Warning Letter to 23andMe, Inc. https://doi.org/wwwfdagov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296htm.
Forrest, L. E., Burke, J., Bacic, S., & Amor, D. J. (2008). Increased genetic counseling support improves communication of genetic information in families. Genetics in Medicine, 10(3), 167–172.
Fox S (2011) The social life of health information, 2011. Prew research center’s internet & American life project. Pew research center
Fox, S. (2013). After Dr Google: peer-to-peer health care. Pediatrics, 131(Suppl 4), S224–225.
Fox S, Duggan M (2013) Health Online 2013. Pew Research Center:https://doi.org/www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/PIP_HealthOnline.pdf.
Frost JH, Massagli MP (2008) Social uses of personal health information within patientslikeme, an online patient community: what can happen when patients have access to one another’s data. J Med Internet Res 10 (3)
Haga, S. B., Barry, W. T., Mills, R., Ginsburg, G. S., Svetkey, L., Sullivan, J., et al. (2013). Public knowledge of and attitudes toward genetics and genetic testing. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers, 17(4), 327–335.
Hesse, B. W., Nelson, D. E., Kreps, G. L., Croyle, R. T., Arora, N. K., Rimer, B. K., et al. (2005). Trust and sources of health information: the impact of the internet and its implications for health care providers: findings from the first health information national trends survey. Archives of Internal Medicine, 165(22), 2618–2624.
Horrigan JB, Rainie L (2002) Counting on the Internet. Pew Internet & American Life Project.
Kim, K., & Kwon, N. (2010). Profile of e-patients: analysis of their cancer information-seeking from a national survey. Journal of Health Communication, 15(7), 712–733.
Lachance, C. R., Erby, L. A., Ford, B. M., Allen, V. C., Jr., & Kaphingst, K. A. (2010). Informational content, literacy demands, and usability of websites offering health-related genetic tests directly to consumers. Genetics in Medicine: Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 12(5), 304–312.
Lanie, A. D., Jayaratne, T. E., Sheldon, J. P., Kardia, S. L., Anderson, E. S., Feldbaum, M., et al. (2004). Exploring the public understanding of basic genetic concepts. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 13(4), 305–320.
Lea, D. H., Kaphingst, K. A., Bowen, D., Lipkus, I., & Hadley, D. W. (2011). Communicating genetic and genomic information: health literacy and numeracy considerations. Public Health Genomics, 14(4–5), 279–289.
Lehmann, L. S., Weeks, J. C., Klar, N., Biener, L., & Garber, J. E. (2000). Disclosure of familial genetic information: perceptions of the duty to inform. American Journal of Medicine, 109(9), 705–711.
Lemire, M., Sicotte, C., & Pare, G. (2008). Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health. Health Policy, 88(1), 130–140.
Miller, L. M., & Bell, R. A. (2012). Online health information seeking: the influence of age, information trustworthiness, and search challenges. Journal of Aging and Health, 24(3), 525–541.
Mills R, Barry W, Haga SB (2013) Public trust in genomic risk assessment for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of genetic counseling [epub ahead of print]
Montgomery, G. H., Erblich, J., DiLorenzo, T., & Bovbjerg, D. H. (2003). Family and friends with disease: their impact on perceived risk. Preventive Medicine, 37(3), 242–249.
NDIC (2007) Type 2 diabetes: what you need to know. ed07 edn
Neelapala, P., Duvvi, S. K., Kumar, G., & Kumar, B. N. (2008). Do gynaecology outpatients use the internet to seek health information? A questionnaire survey. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 14(2), 300–304.
Nelson, D. E., Kreps, G. L., Hesse, B. W., Croyle, R. T., Willis, G., Arora, N. K., et al. (2004). The health information national trends survey (HINTS): development, design, and dissemination. Journal of Health Communication, 9(5), 443–460. discussion 481–444.
NIH (2006) Small steps, big rewards: your game plan to prevent type 2 diabetes
Norman, C. D., & Skinner, H. A. (2006). eHEALS: the ehealth literacy scale. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 8(4), e27.
Palomaki, G. E., Melillo, S., Marrone, M., & Douglas, M. P. (2013). Use of genomic panels to determine risk of developing type 2 diabetes in the general population: a targeted evidence-based review. Genetics in Medicine, 15(8), 600–611.
Park, J., Chung, H., & Yoo, W. S. (2009). Is the Internet a primary source for consumer information search?: group comparison for channel choices. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 92–99.
Plantinga, L., Natowicz, M. R., Kass, N. E., Hull, S. C., Gostin, L. O., & Faden, R. R. (2003). Disclosure, confidentiality, and families: experiences and attitudes of those with genetic versus nongenetic medical conditions. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 119C(1), 51–59.
Prudente, S., Dallapiccola, B., Pellegrini, F., Doria, A., & Trischitta, V. (2012). Genetic prediction of common diseases. Still no help for the clinical diabetologist! Nutrition, Metabolism, and Cardiovascular Diseases, 22(11), 929–936.
Siliquini, R., Ceruti, M., Lovato, E., Bert, F., Bruno, S., De Vito, E., et al. (2011). Surfing the internet for health information: an italian survey on use and population choices. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 11, 21.
Stoffel, E. M., Ford, B., Mercado, R. C., Punglia, D., Kohlmann, W., Conrad, P., et al. (2008). Sharing genetic test results in Lynch syndrome: communication with close and distant relatives. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 6(3), 333–338.
Tuffrey, C., & Finlay, F. (2002). Use of the internet by parents of paediatric outpatients. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 87(6), 534–536.
van der Vaart, R., van Deursen, A. J., Drossaert, C. H., Taal, E., van Dijk, J. A., & van de Laar, M. A. (2011). Does the eHealth Literacy Scale (eHEALS) measure what it intends to measure? Validation of a Dutch version of the eHEALS in two adult populations. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(4), e86.
van Uden-Kraan, C. F., Drossaert, C. H., Taal, E., Smit, W. M., Moens, H. J., Siesling, S., et al. (2009). Health-related Internet use by patients with somatic diseases: frequency of use and characteristics of users. Informatics for Health & Social Care, 34(1), 18–29.
Viswanath, K. (2005). Science and society: the communications revolution and cancer control. Nature Reviews Cancer, 5(10), 828–835.
Wagner Costalas, J., Itzen, M., Malick, J., Babb, J. S., Bove, B., Godwin, A. K., et al. (2003). Communication of BRCA1 and BRCA2 results to at-risk relatives: a cancer risk assessment program’s experience. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part C, Seminars in Medical Genetics, 119C(1), 11–18.
Wong, L. M., Yan, H., Margel, D., & Fleshner, N. E. (2013a). Urologists in cyberspace: a review of the quality of health information from American urologists’ websites using three validated tools. Cancer Urologia Association Journal, 7(3–4), 100–107.
Wong MCS, Hirai HW, Luk AKC, Lam TYT, Ching JYL, Griffiths SM et al. (2013) The knowledge of colorectal cancer symptoms and risk factors among 10,078 screening participants: are high risk individuals more knowledgeable? PloS one 8 (4)
Ye, Y. (2011). Correlates of consumer trust in online health information: findings from the health information national trends survey. Journal of Health Communication, 16(1), 34–49.
Zeng, Q. T., Kogan, S., Plovnick, R. M., Crowell, J., Lacroix, E. M., & Greenes, R. A. (2004). Positive attitudes and failed queries: an exploration of the conundrums of consumer health information retrieval. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 73(1), 45–55.
Zhang Y, He D, Sang YM (2013) Facebook as a platform for health information and communication: a case study of a diabetes group. J Med Syst 37 (3)
Zulman, D. M., Kirch, M., Zheng, K., & An, L. C. (2011). Trust in the internet as a health resource among older adults: analysis of data from a nationally representative survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 13(1), e19.
Acknowledgments
This work was funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (1R21HL096573-01A1). This study is registered in clinicaltrials.gov as # NCT01186354. The authors thank Dr. Sunil Suchindran for his assistance with data analysis.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
Conflict of Interests
Author R. Mills, Author J. Powell and Author W. Barry declare that they have no conflict of interest. Author S.B. Haga is a paid consultant to the non-profit Inova Translational Medicine Institute.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mills, R., Powell, J., Barry, W. et al. Information-Seeking and Sharing Behavior Following Genomic Testing for Diabetes Risk. J Genet Counsel 24, 58–66 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9736-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-014-9736-1