nach oben

Journal of Genetic Counseling

Erschienen in:

01.06.2012 | Original Research

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests Awareness in HINTS 2007: Sociodemographic and Numeracy Correlates

verfasst von: Aisha T. Langford, Ken Resnicow, J. Scott Roberts, Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher

Erschienen in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Ausgabe 3/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

To examine the association of 1) race/ethnicity and 2) numeracy with awareness of DTC genetic tests. Secondary analysis of 6,754 Hispanic, black, and white adult respondents to the National Cancer Institute’s 2007 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS). Logistic regression was used to examine sociodemographic predictors of DTC genetic tests awareness including race/ethnicity, income, education, and gender. Next, two numeracy variables were added to the model. After controlling for sociodemographic variables, black respondents were significantly less likely to have heard of DTC genetic tests compared to white respondents (OR = 0.79; CI: 0.65–0.97). When numeracy variables were added to the model, the effect of black race was no longer significant (OR = 0.84; CI: 0.69–1.04). Hispanic respondents did not significantly differ from white respondents in awareness of DTC genetic tests. Other significant correlates of DTC genetic tests awareness in the full model included education, income, age, and numeracy variables including degree to which people use medical statistics and numbers to make health decisions, and preference for words or numbers when discussing “the chance of something happening.” Although black respondents were generally less aware of DTC genetic tests than white respondents, this relationship appears to be partially mediated by numeracy.

110th Congress (2008). H.R.493. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.00493. Accessed 5 June 2011.

23andMe (2011). Core values. https://www.23andme.com/about/values/. Accessed 18 Sept 2011.

Akl, E. A., Oxman, A. D., Herrin, J., Vist, G. E., Terrenato, I., Sperati, F., et al. (2011). Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions. Cochrane Database of Systematic Review (3), CD006776. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006776.pub2.

Ameer, B., & Krivoy, N. (2009). Direct-to-consumer/patient advertising of genetic testing: A position statement of the American College of Clinical Pharmacology. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 49(8), 886–888. doi:10.1177/0091270009335948.PubMedCrossRef

American College of Medical Genetics (2008). ACMG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. http://www.acmg.net/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Policy_Statements&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=2975. Accessed 18 Sept 2011.

American Society of Human Genetics (2007). ASHG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the United States. http://ashg.org/pdf/dtc_statement.pdf. Accessed Sept 2011.

Armstrong, K., Micco, E., Carney, A., Stopfer, J., & Putt, M. (2005). Racial differences in the use of BRCA1/2 testing among women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293(14), 1729–1736. doi:10.1001/jama.293.14.1729.PubMedCrossRef

CDC (2008). Adding power to our voices: A framing guide for communicating about injury. http://wwwn.cdc.gov/NCIPC-SuccessStory/files/Adding%20Power%20to%20Our%20Voices%20Injury%20Framing%20Guide.pdf. Accessed 22 Sept 2011.

Center for Health Improvement (2004). Using data strategically: Social math. http://www.chipolicy.org/pdf/TA5.pdf. Accessed 23 Sept 2011.

Fagerlin, A., Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Ubel, P. A., Jankovic, A., Derry, H. A., & Smith, D. M. (2007). Measuring numeracy without a math test: Development of the subjective numeracy scale. Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 672–680. doi:10.1177/0272989x07304449.PubMedCrossRef

Fischhoff, B., Brewer, N., & Downs, J. (2011). Communicating risks and benefits: An evidence-based user’s guide http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/Reports/UCM268069.pdf. Accessed 22 Sept 2011.

Garcia-Retamero, R., & Galesic, M. (2010). Who profits from visual aids: Overcoming challenges in people’s understanding of risks [corrected]. Social Science & Medicine, 70(7), 1019–1025. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2009.11.031.CrossRef

Genetic Alliance (2011). Genetic alliance resources and services. http://www.geneticalliance.org/resources#engage. Accessed 20 Sept 2011.

Genetics Home Reference (2011). What is direct-to-consumer genetic testing? http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/testing/directtoconsumer. Accessed 5 Feb 2011.

GenoCommunity Think Tank (2011). Knowledge modules. http://genocommunity.org/index.php?note=Events. Accessed 5 June 2011.

Ginde, A. A., Clark, S., Goldstein, J. N., & Camargo, C. A., Jr. (2008). Demographic disparities in numeracy among emergency department patients: Evidence from two multicenter studies. Patient Education and Counseling, 72(2), 350–356. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.03.012.PubMedCrossRef

Goddard, K. A., Duquette, D., Zlot, A., Johnson, J., Annis-Emeott, A., Lee, P. W., et al. (2009). Public awareness and use of direct-to-consumer genetic tests: Results from 3 state population-based surveys, 2006. American Journal of Public Health, 99(3), 442–445. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.131631.PubMedCrossRef

Gollust, S. E., Hull, S. C., & Wilfond, B. S. (2002). Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288(14), 1762–1767.PubMedCrossRef

Hamilton, A. (2008). Best inventions of 2008. http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1852747_1854493,00.html. Accessed 5 June 2011.

Hipps, Y. G., Roberts, J. S., Farrer, L. A., & Green, R. C. (2003). Differences between African Americans and Whites in their attitudes toward genetic testing for Alzheimer’s disease. Genetic Testing, 7(1), 39–44. doi:10.1089/109065703321560921.PubMedCrossRef

Hogarth, S., Javitt, G., & Melzer, D. (2008). The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: Legal, ethical, and policy issues. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 9, 161–182. doi:10.1146/annurev.genom.9.081307.164319.PubMedCrossRef

Kaplan, J. B., & Bennett, T. (2003). Use of race and ethnicity in biomedical publication. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 289(20), 2709–2716. doi:10.1001/jama.289.20.2709.CrossRef

Kreuter, M. W., Strecher, V. J., & Glassman, B. (1999). One size does not fit all: The case for tailoring print materials. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 21(4), 276–283.PubMedCrossRef

Kutz, G. (2010). Direct-to-consumer genetic tests: Misleading test results are further complicated by deceptive marketing and other questionable practices (p. 33). Washington: U.S. Government Accountability Office.

Langford, A., Resnicow, K., & An, L. (2010). Clinical trial awareness among racial/ethnic minorities in HINTS 2007: Sociodemographic, attitudinal, and knowledge correlates. Journal of Health Communication, 15(Suppl 3), 92–101. doi:10.1080/10810730.2010.525296.PubMedCrossRef

Laskey, S. L., Williams, J., Pierre-Louis, J., O’Riordan, M., Matthews, A., & Robin, N. H. (2003). Attitudes of African American premedical students toward genetic testing and screening. Genetics in Medicine, 5(1), 49–54. doi:10.1097/01.GIM.0000046360.61376.EB.PubMedCrossRef

Leighton, J. W., Valverde, K., & Bernhardt, B. A. (2011). The general public’s understanding and perception of direct-to-consumer genetic test results. Public Health Genomics. doi:10.1159/000327159.

Lipkus, I. M. (2007). Numeric, verbal, and visual formats of conveying health risks: Suggested best practices and future recommendations. Medical Decision Making, 27(5), 696–713. doi:10.1177/0272989x07307271.PubMedCrossRef

Matloff, E., & Caplan, A. (2008). Direct to confusion: Lessons learned from marketing BRCA testing. The American Journal of Bioethics, 8(6), 5–8. doi:10.1080/15265160802248179.PubMedCrossRef

McBride, C. M., Wade, C. H., & Kaphingst, K. A. (2010). Consumers’ views of direct-to-consumer genetic information. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 11, 427–446. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082509-141604.PubMedCrossRef

McGuire, A. L., & Burke, W. (2008). An unwelcome side effect of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: Raiding the medical commons. Journal of the American Medical Association, 300(22), 2669–2671. doi:10.1001/jama.2008.803.PubMedCrossRef

National Cancer Institute (2009a). Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2007: Final report. http://hints.cancer.gov/docs/HINTS2007FinalReport.pdf. Accessed 7 May 2011.

National Cancer Institute (2009b). HINTS survey instruments. http://hints.cancer.gov/instrument.aspx. Accessed 7 May 2011.

National Human Genome Research Institute (2010a). Direct to consumer marketing of genetic tests. http://www.genome.gov/12010659. Accessed 5 Feb 2011.

National Human Genome Research Institute (2010b). Frequently asked questions about genetic testing. http://www.genome.gov/19516567#al-5. Accessed 7 Feb 2011.

National Society of Genetic Counselors (2007). Position statements: Direct to consumer genetic testing. http://www.nsgc.org/Media/PositionStatements/tabid/330/Default.aspx#DTC. Accessed 18 Sept 2011.

Ortiz, A. P., Lopez, M., Flores, L. T., Soto-Salgado, M., Finney Rutten, L. J., Serrano-Rodriguez, R. A., et al. (2011). Awareness of direct-to-consumer genetic tests and use of genetic tests among Puerto Rican adults, 2009. Preventing Chronic Disease, 8(5), A110.PubMed

Osborn, C. Y., Cavanaugh, K., Wallston, K. A., White, R. O., & Rothman, R. L. (2009). Diabetes numeracy: An overlooked factor in understanding racial disparities in glycemic control. Diabetes Care, 32(9), 1614–1619. doi:10.2337/dc09-0425.PubMedCrossRef

Peters, E., Hibbard, J., Slovic, P., & Dieckmann, N. (2007). Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Affairs (Millwood), 26(3), 741–748. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.741.CrossRef

Powers, B. J., Trinh, J. V., & Bosworth, H. B. (2010). Can this patient read and understand written health information? Journal of the American Medical Association, 304(1), 76–84. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.896.PubMedCrossRef

Genetics and Public Policy Center (2006). Public health at risk: Failures in oversight of genetic testing laboratories. http://www.dnapolicy.org/images/reportpdfs/PublicHealthAtRiskFinalWithCover.pdf. Accessed 5 May 2011.

Ramirez, A. G., Aparicio-Ting, F. E., de Majors, S. S., & Miller, A. R. (2006). Interest, awareness, and perceptions of genetic testing among Hispanic family members of breast cancer survivors. Ethnicity & Disease, 16(2), 398–403.

Reyna, V. F., Nelson, W. L., Han, P. K., & Dieckmann, N. F. (2009). How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 135(6), 943–973. doi:10.1037/a0017327.PubMedCrossRef

Singer, E., Antonucci, T., & Van Hoewyk, J. (2004). Racial and ethnic variations in knowledge and attitudes about genetic testing. Genetic Testing, 8(1), 31–43. doi:10.1089/109065704323016012.PubMedCrossRef

Suther, S., & Kiros, G. E. (2009). Barriers to the use of genetic testing: A study of racial and ethnic disparities. Genetics in Medicine, 11(9), 655–662. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181ab22aa.PubMedCrossRef

Waldrop-Valverde, D., Osborn, C. Y., Rodriguez, A., Rothman, R. L., Kumar, M., & Jones, D. L. (2010). Numeracy skills explain racial differences in HIV medication management. AIDS and Behavior, 14(4), 799–806. doi:10.1007/s10461-009-9604-4.PubMedCrossRef

Woloshin, S., Schwartz, L. M., & Welch, H. G. (2005). Patients and medical statistics. Interest, confidence, and ability. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 20(11), 996–1000. doi:10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.00179.x.PubMedCrossRef

Zikmund-Fisher, B. J., Fagerlin, A., & Ubel, P. A. (2010). A demonstration of “less can be more” in risk graphics. Medical Decision Making, 30(6), 661–671. doi:10.1177/0272989x10364244.PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Racial and Ethnic Differences in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests Awareness in HINTS 2007: Sociodemographic and Numeracy Correlates
verfasst von: Aisha T. Langford
Ken Resnicow
J. Scott Roberts
Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2012
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Ausgabe 3/2012
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9478-2

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Mehr Brustkrebs, aber weniger andere gynäkologische Tumoren mit Levonorgestrel-IUS

04.06.2024 Levonorgestrel Nachrichten

Unter Frauen, die ein Levonorgestrel-freisetzendes intrauterines System (IUS) verwenden, ist die Brustkrebsrate um 13% erhöht. Dafür kommt es deutlich seltener zu Endometrium-, Zervix- und Ovarialkarzinomen.

Prämenstruelle Beschwerden mit Suizidrisiko assoziiert

04.06.2024 Suizidalität Nachrichten

Manche Frauen, die regelmäßig psychische und körperliche Symptome vor ihrer Menstruation erleben, haben ein deutlich erhöhtes Suizidrisiko. Jüngere Frauen sind besonders gefährdet.

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

28.05.2024 Kinder- und Jugendgynäkologie Nachrichten

Welchen Einfluss das Alter ihrer Mutter auf das Risiko hat, dass Kinder mit nicht chromosomal bedingter Malformation zur Welt kommen, hat eine ungarische Studie untersucht. Sie zeigt: Nicht nur fortgeschrittenes Alter ist riskant.

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

28.05.2024 Fehlerkultur Podcast

Darüber reden und aus Fehlern lernen, sollte das Motto in der Medizin lauten. Und zwar nicht nur im Sinne der Patientensicherheit. Eine negative Fehlerkultur kann auch die Behandelnden ernsthaft krank machen, warnt Prof. Dr. Reinhard Strametz. Ein Plädoyer und ein Leitfaden für den offenen Umgang mit kritischen Ereignissen in Medizin und Pflege.

Update Gynäkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests Awareness in HINTS 2007: Sociodemographic and Numeracy Correlates

Abstract

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Mehr Brustkrebs, aber weniger andere gynäkologische Tumoren mit Levonorgestrel-IUS

Prämenstruelle Beschwerden mit Suizidrisiko assoziiert

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Update Gynäkologie

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2012

Informed Choice in Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing (DTCGT) Websites: A Content Analysis of Benefits, Risks, and Limitations

Communication about DTC Testing: Commentary on a ‘Family Experience of Personal Genomics’

Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing: A Case Study and Practical Recommendations for “Genomic Counseling”

Perception of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing and Direct-To-Consumer Advertising of Genetic Tests among Members of a Large Managed Care Organization

A Family Experience of Personal Genomics

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: What Are We Talking About?

Neu im Fachgebiet Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe

Mehr Brustkrebs, aber weniger andere gynäkologische Tumoren mit Levonorgestrel-IUS

Prämenstruelle Beschwerden mit Suizidrisiko assoziiert

Alter der Mutter beeinflusst Risiko für kongenitale Anomalie

Fehlerkultur in der Medizin – Offenheit zählt!

Update Gynäkologie