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。

IF 6.6 1区 医学 Q1 GENETICS & HEREDITY Genetics in Medicine Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI:10.1016/j.gim.2024.101306
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}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的开发并评估临床医师报告的产前基因检测效用 InDEX(C-GUIDETM)的表面效度和结构效度:方法:在进行文献回顾并咨询临床专家后,制定了 C-GUIDE Prenatal 初稿。然后,19 名产前遗传学服务提供者通过访谈和调查对其表面和内容有效性进行了评估。反馈意见为进一步修订提供了依据。为了检验构建效度,四位遗传学家对接受产前基因检测的病例进行了回顾性抽样,完成了 C-GUIDE,并同时使用锚点项目对这些病例的效用进行了全面评估。使用广义估计方程模型来调整评分者之间的相关性,并测量 C-GUIDE 评分、全局项目评分和潜在临床变量之间的关联:为了开发 C-GUIDE Prenatal,删除了 7 个项目,修改了 10 个项目,增加了 4 个项目。在 101 个进行验证评分的病例中,总体项目得分每增加 1 分,C-GUIDE 得分平均增加 1.1 分(p=0.04)。与无信息的结果相比,有信息的阳性和阴性结果平均增加 10.7 分(SE=1.05)(p 结论:C-GUIDE总分与总体项目得分之间以及C-GUIDE总分、结果类型、检测指征和妊娠状态之间在预期方向上的显着正相关提供了构建有效性的证据。
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
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.

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
Genetics in Medicine
Genetics in Medicine 医学-遗传学
CiteScore
15.20
自引率
6.80%
发文量
857
审稿时长
1.3 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Biomarker testing for lysosomal diseases: A technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Editorial Board Masthead Table of Contents Correspondence on “The ClinGen Brain Malformation Variant Curation Expert Panel: Rules for somatic variants in AKT3, MTOR, PIK3CA, and PIK3R2” by Lai et al
×
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