家长和医疗服务提供者对非洲裂隙家庭基因组研究结果返还的看法。

Q1 Arts and Humanities AJOB Empirical Bioethics Pub Date : 2024-04-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-18 DOI:10.1080/23294515.2024.2302993
Abimbola M Oladayo, Sydney Prochaska, Tamara Busch, Wasiu L Adeyemo, Lord J J Gowans, Mekonen Eshete, Waheed Awotoye, Veronica Sule, Azeez Alade, Adebowale A Adeyemo, Peter A Mossey, Anya Prince, Jeffrey C Murray, Azeez Butali
{"title":"家长和医疗服务提供者对非洲裂隙家庭基因组研究结果返还的看法。","authors":"Abimbola M Oladayo, Sydney Prochaska, Tamara Busch, Wasiu L Adeyemo, Lord J J Gowans, Mekonen Eshete, Waheed Awotoye, Veronica Sule, Azeez Alade, Adebowale A Adeyemo, Peter A Mossey, Anya Prince, Jeffrey C Murray, Azeez Butali","doi":"10.1080/23294515.2024.2302993","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inadequate knowledge among health care providers (HCPs) and parents of affected children limits the understanding and utility of secondary genetic findings (SFs) in under-represented populations in genomics research. SFs arise from deep DNA sequencing done for research or diagnostic purposes and may burden patients and their families despite their potential health importance. This study aims to evaluate the perspective of both groups regarding SFs and their choices in the return of results from genetic testing in the context of orofacial clefts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using an online survey, we evaluated the experiences of 252 HCPs and 197 parents across participating cleft clinics in Ghana and Nigeria toward the return of SFs across several domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 1.6% of the HCPs felt they had an expert understanding of when and how to incorporate genomic medicine into practice, while 50.0% agreed that all SFs should be returned to patients. About 95.4% of parents were willing to receive all the information from genetic testing (including SFs), while the majority cited physicians as their primary information source (64%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, parents and providers were aware that genetic testing could help in the clinical management of diseases. However, they cited a lack of knowledge about genomic medicine, uncertain clinical utility, and lack of available learning resources as barriers. The knowledge gained from this study will assist with developing guidelines and policies to guide providers on the return of SFs in sub-Saharan Africa and across the continent.</p>","PeriodicalId":38118,"journal":{"name":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","volume":" ","pages":"133-146"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11153024/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parents and Provider Perspectives on the Return of Genomic Findings for Cleft Families in Africa.\",\"authors\":\"Abimbola M Oladayo, Sydney Prochaska, Tamara Busch, Wasiu L Adeyemo, Lord J J Gowans, Mekonen Eshete, Waheed Awotoye, Veronica Sule, Azeez Alade, Adebowale A Adeyemo, Peter A Mossey, Anya Prince, Jeffrey C Murray, Azeez Butali\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23294515.2024.2302993\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Inadequate knowledge among health care providers (HCPs) and parents of affected children limits the understanding and utility of secondary genetic findings (SFs) in under-represented populations in genomics research. SFs arise from deep DNA sequencing done for research or diagnostic purposes and may burden patients and their families despite their potential health importance. This study aims to evaluate the perspective of both groups regarding SFs and their choices in the return of results from genetic testing in the context of orofacial clefts.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using an online survey, we evaluated the experiences of 252 HCPs and 197 parents across participating cleft clinics in Ghana and Nigeria toward the return of SFs across several domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Only 1.6% of the HCPs felt they had an expert understanding of when and how to incorporate genomic medicine into practice, while 50.0% agreed that all SFs should be returned to patients. About 95.4% of parents were willing to receive all the information from genetic testing (including SFs), while the majority cited physicians as their primary information source (64%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, parents and providers were aware that genetic testing could help in the clinical management of diseases. However, they cited a lack of knowledge about genomic medicine, uncertain clinical utility, and lack of available learning resources as barriers. The knowledge gained from this study will assist with developing guidelines and policies to guide providers on the return of SFs in sub-Saharan Africa and across the continent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"133-146\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11153024/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AJOB Empirical Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2024.2302993\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB Empirical Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23294515.2024.2302993","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:医疗保健提供者(HCPs)和患儿家长对二次遗传结果(SFs)的认识不足,限制了对基因组学研究中代表性不足人群二次遗传结果(SFs)的了解和利用。SFs产生于为研究或诊断目的而进行的深度DNA测序,尽管对健康具有潜在的重要性,但可能会给患者及其家庭带来负担。本研究旨在评估这两类人群对 SFs 的看法,以及他们在返回口面裂基因检测结果时的选择:方法:通过在线调查,我们评估了加纳和尼日利亚参与研究的裂隙诊所中 252 名 HCP 和 197 名家长在多个领域对 SFs 返还的体验:结果:只有 1.6% 的初级保健人员认为他们对何时以及如何将基因组医学纳入实践有专业的理解,而 50.0% 的初级保健人员同意应将所有 SF 返还给患者。约 95.4% 的家长愿意接受基因检测的所有信息(包括 SFs),而大多数家长认为医生是他们的主要信息来源(64%):总体而言,家长和医疗服务提供者都知道基因检测有助于疾病的临床治疗。结论:总体而言,家长和医疗服务提供者都意识到基因检测有助于疾病的临床治疗,但他们认为基因组医学知识匮乏、临床效用不确定以及缺乏可用的学习资源是障碍。从这项研究中获得的知识将有助于制定指导方针和政策,指导撒哈拉以南非洲和整个非洲大陆的医疗服务提供者返回 SFs。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Parents and Provider Perspectives on the Return of Genomic Findings for Cleft Families in Africa.

Background: Inadequate knowledge among health care providers (HCPs) and parents of affected children limits the understanding and utility of secondary genetic findings (SFs) in under-represented populations in genomics research. SFs arise from deep DNA sequencing done for research or diagnostic purposes and may burden patients and their families despite their potential health importance. This study aims to evaluate the perspective of both groups regarding SFs and their choices in the return of results from genetic testing in the context of orofacial clefts.

Methods: Using an online survey, we evaluated the experiences of 252 HCPs and 197 parents across participating cleft clinics in Ghana and Nigeria toward the return of SFs across several domains.

Results: Only 1.6% of the HCPs felt they had an expert understanding of when and how to incorporate genomic medicine into practice, while 50.0% agreed that all SFs should be returned to patients. About 95.4% of parents were willing to receive all the information from genetic testing (including SFs), while the majority cited physicians as their primary information source (64%).

Conclusions: Overall, parents and providers were aware that genetic testing could help in the clinical management of diseases. However, they cited a lack of knowledge about genomic medicine, uncertain clinical utility, and lack of available learning resources as barriers. The knowledge gained from this study will assist with developing guidelines and policies to guide providers on the return of SFs in sub-Saharan Africa and across the continent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
AJOB Empirical Bioethics
AJOB Empirical Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Enhancing Animals is "Still Genetics": Perspectives of Genome Scientists and Policymakers on Animal and Human Enhancement. Associations Between the Legalization and Implementation of Medical Aid in Dying and Suicide Rates in the United States. Ethics Consultation in U.S. Pediatric Hospitals: Adherence to National Practice Standards. Monitored and Cared for at Home? Privacy Concerns When Using Smart Home Health Technologies to Care for Older Persons. Advance Medical Decision-Making Differs Across First- and Third-Person Perspectives.
×
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