| 1. |
- Branstrom, Richard, et al.
(författare)
-
Perceptions of genetic research and testing among members of families with an increased risk of malignant melanoma
- 2012
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 1879-0852 .- 0959-8049. ; 48:16, s. 3052-3062
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Several melanoma susceptibility genes have been identified. As part of the international genetic research programme of the GenoMEL consortiums research on genetic mutations in melanoma families, the aim of this study was to examine family members' views about their risk of melanoma, gene testing and genetic research. Methods: Self-report data were gathered using online and paper-based surveys available in four languages among 312 individuals (62% from Europe, 18% from Australia, 13% from the United States of America (USA) and 7% from Israel). Results: Fifty three percent had been diagnosed with a melanoma, and 12% had a positive susceptibility gene test result. Respondents with many moles and freckles were more likely to perceive themselves at risk for developing melanoma (odds ratio [OR](Freckles) = 2.24 with 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-4.26; ORMany (moles) = 6.92, 95% CI = 2.37-20.23). Respondents who had received a non-informative (negative) genetic test result were much less likely to perceive themselves at increased risk (OR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.04-0.73). Safe-guards were perceived as important to protect genetic information, but there was also support for the storage and exchange of such information. Overall, respondents were in favour of genetic testing, even if current knowledge about melanoma risk genes is still limited. Contrary to previous studies, participants reported that a non-informative (negative) genetic test result, although not necessarily indicative of lower risk of melanoma, would be likely to reduce their practise of preventive behaviours. Conclusions: Participants were influenced by their phenotype and test results in risk estimations. They expressed positive views on genetic research and towards genetic testing, but reported that a non-informative (negative) test result might be associated with an (erroneous) perception of reduced risk and fewer preventive behaviours. These results highlight the urgency of improving the quality of genetic counselling and increasing the effectiveness of communication regarding genetic test results. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Eatough, Virginia, et al.
(författare)
-
The personal experience of parenting a child with Juvenile Huntington's Disease : perceptions across Europe
- 2013
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Human Genetics. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1018-4813 .- 1476-5438. ; 21:10, s. 1042-1048
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The study reported here presents a detailed description of what it is like to parent a child with juvenile Huntington's disease in families across four European countries. Its primary aim was to develop and extend findings from a previous UK study. The study recruited parents from four European countries: Holland, Italy, Poland and Sweden,. A secondary aim was to see the extent to which the findings from the UK study were repeated across Europe and the degree of commonality or divergence across the different countries. Fourteen parents who were the primary caregiver took part in a semistructured interview. These were analyzed using an established qualitative methodology, interpretative phenomenological analysis. Five analytic themes were derived from the analysis: the early signs of something wrong; parental understanding of juvenile Huntington's disease; living with the disease; other people's knowledge and understanding; and need for support. These are discussed in light of the considerable convergence between the experiences of families in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in Europe.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lochmueller, Hanns, et al.
(författare)
-
The Position of Neuromuscular Patients in Shared Decision Making. Report from the 235th ENMC Workshop : Milan, Italy, January 19-20, 2018
- 2019
-
Ingår i: JOURNAL OF NEUROMUSCULAR DISEASES. - : IOS Press. - 2214-3599 .- 2214-3602. ; 6:1, s. 161-172
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the era of patient-centered medicine, shared decision-making (SDM) - in which healthcare professionals and patients exchange information and preferences and jointly reach a decision - has emerged as the gold standard model for the provision of formal healthcare. Indeed, in many geographical settings, patients are frequently invited to participate in choices concerning the design and delivery of their medical management. From a clinical perspective, benefits of this type of patient involvement encompass, for example, enhanced treatment satisfaction, improved medical compliance, better health outcomes, and maintained or promoted quality of life. Yet, although the theory and enactment of SDM in healthcare are well-described in the literature [1-3], comparatively less attention has been devoted to contextualizing questions relating to if, when, and how to include patients in decisions within medical research. In this context, patient involvement would be expected to be potentially relevant for and applicable to a wide range of activities and processes, from the identification of research priorities and development of grant applications, to the design of patient information and consent procedures, formulation of interventions, identification and recruitment of study sample populations, feasibility of a clinical trial, identification, selection, and specification of endpoints and outcomes in clinical trials and observational studies, data collection and analysis, and dissemination of results. To this end, 45 clinicians, healthcare professionals, researchers, patients, caregivers, and representatives from regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies from 15 different countries met to discuss the level of involvement of patients with neuromuscular diseases, specifically in the following settings of medical research for neuromuscular diseases: i) registries and biobanks; ii) clinical trials; and iii) regulatory processes. In this report, we present summaries of the talks that were given during the workshop, as well as discussion outcomes from the three topic areas listed above.
|
|
