Impact of Genomic Counseling on Informed Decision-Making among ostensibly Healthy Individuals Seeking Personal Genome Sequencing: the HealthSeq Project
- 982 Downloads
Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of ‘genomic counseling’ on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants’ informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants’ satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = −4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.
KeywordsWhole genome sequencing Informed decision-making Genomic counseling Genetic counseling
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.
- Andermann, A. J., Austoker, J., Watson, E. K., Lucassen, A. M., & Mackay, J. (2002). Development and evaluation of a general information leaflet for women with a family history of breast cancer. Journal of Cancer Education: The Official Journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 17(3), 155–160.Google Scholar
- Baylor Miraca Genetics Laboratory. (2015) Retrieved June 17, 2015 from https://www.bcm.edu/research/medical-genetics-labs/test_detail.cfm?testcode=1605
- Bernhardt, B. A., Soucier, D., Hanson, K., Savage, M. S., Jackson, L., & Wapner, R. J. (2013). Women’s experiences receiving abnormal prenatal chromosomal microarray testing results. Genetics in Medicine: Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 15(2), 139–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Church, G. M. (2005). The personal genome project. Molecular Systems Biology, 1–3.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed., ). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed., ). Los Angeles, Ca: Sage.Google Scholar
- Ishiyama, I., Nagai, A., Muto, K., Tamakoshi, A., Kokado, M., Mimura, K., et al. (2008). Relationship between public attitudes toward genomic studies related to medicine and their level of genomic literacy in Japan. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A, 146A(13), 1696–1706.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- National Society of Genetic Counselors. Retrieved November 10, 2015 from http://nsgc.org/p/cm/ld/fid=175
- O'Connor A.M. User Manual - Decisional Conflict Scale (16 item statement format) [document on the Internet]. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; © 1993 [updated 2010; cited 2015 06 17]. 16 p. Available from http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/User_Manuals/UM_Decisional_Conflict.pdf
- O'Connor A.M. & Cranney A. User Manual – Acceptability [document on the Internet]. Ottawa: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute; © 1996 [modified 2002; cited 2015 06 17]. 5 p. Available from http://decisionaid.ohri.ca/docs/develop/User_Manuals/UM_Acceptability.pdf
- Sanderson, S. C., Diefenbach, M. A., Zinberg, R., Horowitz, C. R., Smirnoff, M., Zweig, M., et al. (2013). Willingness to participate in genomics research and desire for personal results among underrepresented minority patients: a structured interview study. Journal of Community Genetics, 4(4), 469–482.Google Scholar
- Sanderson, S. C., Linderman, M. D., Suckiel, S. A., Diaz, G. A., Zinberg, R. E., Ferryman, K., et al. (2015a). Motivations, concerns and preferences of personal genome sequencing research participants: baseline findings from the healthseq project. European Journal of Human Genetics. Google Scholar
- Sanderson, S. C., Suckiel, S. A., Zweig, M., Bottinger, E. P., Jabs, E. W., & Richardson, L. D. (2015b). Development and preliminary evaluation of an online educational video about whole-genome sequencing for research participants, patients, and the general public. Genetics in Medicine.Google Scholar
- Understand Your Genome (UYG) Sequencing Conference | Illumina. Retrieved August 5, 2014 from http://www.illumina.com/company/events/understand-your-genome.ilmn
- Vassy, J. L., Lautenbach, D. M., McLaughlin, H. M., Kong, S. W., Christensen, K. D., Krier, J., et al. (2014). The MedSeq Project: a randomized trial of integrating whole genome sequencing into clinical medicine. Trials, 15(85), 1–12.Google Scholar