Decision-making about genetic health information among family dyads: a systematic literature review.

IF 6.6 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Health Psychology Review Pub Date : 2022-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-09-29 DOI:10.1080/17437199.2021.1980083
Wai Ki Law, Haley E Yaremych, Rebecca A Ferrer, Ebony Richardson, Yelena P Wu, Erin Turbitt
{"title":"Decision-making about genetic health information among family dyads: a systematic literature review.","authors":"Wai Ki Law,&nbsp;Haley E Yaremych,&nbsp;Rebecca A Ferrer,&nbsp;Ebony Richardson,&nbsp;Yelena P Wu,&nbsp;Erin Turbitt","doi":"10.1080/17437199.2021.1980083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Decisions involving two individuals (i.e., dyadic decision-making) have been increasingly studied in healthcare research. There is evidence of bi-directional influences in decision-making processes among spousal, provider-patient and parent-child dyads. Genetic information can directly impact biologically related individuals. Thus, it is important to understand dyadic decision-making about genetic health information among family members. This systematic literature review aimed to identify literature examining decision-making among family dyads. Peer-reviewed publications were included if they reported quantitative empirical research on dyadic decision-making about genetic information, published between January 1998 and August 2020 and written in English. The search was conducted in 6 databases and returned 3167 articles, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were in the context of cancer genetic testing (<i>n</i> = 8) or reproductive testing or screening (<i>n</i> = 5). Studies reported two broad categories of decisions with dyadic influence: undergoing screening or testing (<i>n</i> = 10) and sharing information with family (<i>n</i> = 5). Factors were correlated between dyads such as attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and psychological wellbeing. Emerging evidence shows that dyad members influence each other when making decisions about receiving or sharing genetic information. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering both members of a dyad in intervention design and clinical interactions.</p>","PeriodicalId":48034,"journal":{"name":"Health Psychology Review","volume":"16 3","pages":"412-429"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2021.1980083","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/9/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Decisions involving two individuals (i.e., dyadic decision-making) have been increasingly studied in healthcare research. There is evidence of bi-directional influences in decision-making processes among spousal, provider-patient and parent-child dyads. Genetic information can directly impact biologically related individuals. Thus, it is important to understand dyadic decision-making about genetic health information among family members. This systematic literature review aimed to identify literature examining decision-making among family dyads. Peer-reviewed publications were included if they reported quantitative empirical research on dyadic decision-making about genetic information, published between January 1998 and August 2020 and written in English. The search was conducted in 6 databases and returned 3167 articles, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were in the context of cancer genetic testing (n = 8) or reproductive testing or screening (n = 5). Studies reported two broad categories of decisions with dyadic influence: undergoing screening or testing (n = 10) and sharing information with family (n = 5). Factors were correlated between dyads such as attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and psychological wellbeing. Emerging evidence shows that dyad members influence each other when making decisions about receiving or sharing genetic information. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering both members of a dyad in intervention design and clinical interactions.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
家族二联体遗传健康信息决策:系统文献综述。
涉及两个人的决策(即二元决策)在医疗保健研究中得到了越来越多的研究。有证据表明,配偶、供养者-病人和父母-子女对决策过程有双向影响。遗传信息可以直接影响生物相关的个体。因此,了解家族成员遗传健康信息的二元决策是很重要的。本系统的文献综述旨在找出研究家庭二联体决策的文献。同行评审的出版物如果报告了1998年1月至2020年8月期间发表的关于遗传信息二元决策的定量实证研究,并以英文撰写,则被纳入其中。在6个数据库中检索,得到3167篇文章,其中15篇符合纳入标准。大多数研究是在癌症基因检测(n = 8)或生殖检测或筛查(n = 5)的背景下进行的。研究报告了两大类具有双重影响的决策:接受筛查或测试(n = 10)和与家人分享信息(n = 5)。二人组之间的相关因素包括态度、知识、行为和心理健康。新出现的证据表明,二分体成员在决定接受或分享遗传信息时,会相互影响。我们的研究结果强调了在干预设计和临床相互作用中考虑两组成员的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Psychology Review
Health Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The publication of Health Psychology Review (HPR) marks a significant milestone in the field of health psychology, as it is the first review journal dedicated to this important and rapidly growing discipline. Edited by a highly respected team, HPR provides a critical platform for the review, development of theories, and conceptual advancements in health psychology. This prestigious international forum not only contributes to the progress of health psychology but also fosters its connection with the broader field of psychology and other related academic and professional domains. With its vital insights, HPR is a must-read for those involved in the study, teaching, and practice of health psychology, behavioral medicine, and related areas.
期刊最新文献
The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder symptomatology and diagnosis in burn survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Yoga as an intervention for stress: a meta-analysis. Analytical decisions pose moral questions. Components of multiple health behaviour change interventions for patients with chronic conditions: a systematic review and meta-regression of randomized trials. Identifying the psychosocial barriers and facilitators associated with the uptake of genetic services for hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review of qualitative studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1