Robin Z Hayeems, Stephanie Luca, Bowen Xiao, Christie Boswell-Patterson, Carolina Lavin Venegas, Clarissa R Abi Semaan, Tessa Kolar, Diane Myles-Reid, Lauren Chad, David Dyment, Kym M Boycott, Joanna Lazier, Wendy J Ungar, Christine M Armour
{"title":"用于产前护理的临床医师报告基因检测效用 InDEx (C-GUIDE):内容和结构有效性的初步证据。","authors":"Robin Z Hayeems, Stephanie Luca, Bowen Xiao, Christie Boswell-Patterson, Carolina Lavin Venegas, Clarissa R Abi Semaan, Tessa Kolar, Diane Myles-Reid, Lauren Chad, David Dyment, Kym M Boycott, Joanna Lazier, Wendy J Ungar, Christine M Armour","doi":"10.1016/j.gim.2024.101306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and assess the face and construct validity of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEX (C-GUIDE<sup>TM</sup>) for genetic testing in prenatal care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a literature review and consultation with clinical experts, a preliminary draft of C-GUIDE Prenatal was developed. Its face and content validity were then assessed by 19 prenatal genetics' providers using interviews and surveys. Feedback informed further revisions. To test construct validity, four geneticist raters completed C-GUIDE on a retrospective sample of cases that received prenatal genetic testing and completed a concurrent global assessment of utility of these cases using an anchor item. A generalized estimating equations model was used to adjust for rater correlation and measure the association between C-GUIDE scores, global item scores, and potential clinical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>To develop C-GUIDE Prenatal, 7 items were removed, 10 items were modified, and 4 items were added. For 101 cases rated for validation, on average, a 1-point increase in the global item score was associated with an increase of 1.1 in the C-GUIDE score (p=0.04). Compared to uninformative results, informative positive and informative negative results were associated with a mean increase of 10.7 (SE=1.05) (p<0.001) and 5.6 (SE=1.85) (p<0.001), respectively. As indications for testing, known/familial variants were associated with a mean increase in the C-GUIDE score of 4.7 (SE=2.21) (p < 0.001) compared to ultrasound findings. C-GUIDE scores increased by a mean of 3.0 (SE=0.23) among cases for whom pregnancies were ongoing compared to those for whom they were not (p<0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The significant positive associations between C-GUIDE total and the global item score and between C-GUIDE total, result type, indication for testing, and pregnancy status in the expected directions provide evidence of construct validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":12717,"journal":{"name":"Genetics in Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) for Prenatal Care: Initial evidence of content and construct validity.\",\"authors\":\"Robin Z Hayeems, Stephanie Luca, Bowen Xiao, Christie Boswell-Patterson, Carolina Lavin Venegas, Clarissa R Abi Semaan, Tessa Kolar, Diane Myles-Reid, Lauren Chad, David Dyment, Kym M Boycott, Joanna Lazier, Wendy J Ungar, Christine M Armour\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.gim.2024.101306\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and assess the face and construct validity of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEX (C-GUIDE<sup>TM</sup>) for genetic testing in prenatal care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a literature review and consultation with clinical experts, a preliminary draft of C-GUIDE Prenatal was developed. Its face and content validity were then assessed by 19 prenatal genetics' providers using interviews and surveys. Feedback informed further revisions. To test construct validity, four geneticist raters completed C-GUIDE on a retrospective sample of cases that received prenatal genetic testing and completed a concurrent global assessment of utility of these cases using an anchor item. A generalized estimating equations model was used to adjust for rater correlation and measure the association between C-GUIDE scores, global item scores, and potential clinical variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>To develop C-GUIDE Prenatal, 7 items were removed, 10 items were modified, and 4 items were added. For 101 cases rated for validation, on average, a 1-point increase in the global item score was associated with an increase of 1.1 in the C-GUIDE score (p=0.04). Compared to uninformative results, informative positive and informative negative results were associated with a mean increase of 10.7 (SE=1.05) (p<0.001) and 5.6 (SE=1.85) (p<0.001), respectively. As indications for testing, known/familial variants were associated with a mean increase in the C-GUIDE score of 4.7 (SE=2.21) (p < 0.001) compared to ultrasound findings. C-GUIDE scores increased by a mean of 3.0 (SE=0.23) among cases for whom pregnancies were ongoing compared to those for whom they were not (p<0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The significant positive associations between C-GUIDE total and the global item score and between C-GUIDE total, result type, indication for testing, and pregnancy status in the expected directions provide evidence of construct validity.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Genetics in Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Genetics in Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2024.101306\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gim.2024.101306","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEx (C-GUIDE) for Prenatal Care: Initial evidence of content and construct validity.
Objective: To develop and assess the face and construct validity of the Clinician-reported Genetic testing Utility InDEX (C-GUIDETM) for genetic testing in prenatal care.
Methods: Following a literature review and consultation with clinical experts, a preliminary draft of C-GUIDE Prenatal was developed. Its face and content validity were then assessed by 19 prenatal genetics' providers using interviews and surveys. Feedback informed further revisions. To test construct validity, four geneticist raters completed C-GUIDE on a retrospective sample of cases that received prenatal genetic testing and completed a concurrent global assessment of utility of these cases using an anchor item. A generalized estimating equations model was used to adjust for rater correlation and measure the association between C-GUIDE scores, global item scores, and potential clinical variables.
Results: To develop C-GUIDE Prenatal, 7 items were removed, 10 items were modified, and 4 items were added. For 101 cases rated for validation, on average, a 1-point increase in the global item score was associated with an increase of 1.1 in the C-GUIDE score (p=0.04). Compared to uninformative results, informative positive and informative negative results were associated with a mean increase of 10.7 (SE=1.05) (p<0.001) and 5.6 (SE=1.85) (p<0.001), respectively. As indications for testing, known/familial variants were associated with a mean increase in the C-GUIDE score of 4.7 (SE=2.21) (p < 0.001) compared to ultrasound findings. C-GUIDE scores increased by a mean of 3.0 (SE=0.23) among cases for whom pregnancies were ongoing compared to those for whom they were not (p<0.01).
Conclusions: The significant positive associations between C-GUIDE total and the global item score and between C-GUIDE total, result type, indication for testing, and pregnancy status in the expected directions provide evidence of construct validity.
期刊介绍:
Genetics in Medicine (GIM) is the official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. The journal''s mission is to enhance the knowledge, understanding, and practice of medical genetics and genomics through publications in clinical and laboratory genetics and genomics, including ethical, legal, and social issues as well as public health.
GIM encourages research that combats racism, includes diverse populations and is written by authors from diverse and underrepresented backgrounds.