Zoe Fehlberg, Louise Fisher, Cun Liu, Nathasha Kugenthiran, Roger L Milne, Mary-Anne Young, Amanda Willis, Melissa C Southey, Ilias Goranitis, Stephanie Best
{"title":"Using a behaviour-change approach to support uptake of population genomic screening and management options for breast or prostate cancer.","authors":"Zoe Fehlberg, Louise Fisher, Cun Liu, Nathasha Kugenthiran, Roger L Milne, Mary-Anne Young, Amanda Willis, Melissa C Southey, Ilias Goranitis, Stephanie Best","doi":"10.1038/s41431-024-01729-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>As the possibility of implementing population genomic screening programs for the risk of developing hereditary cancers in health systems increases, understanding how to support individuals who wish to have genomic screening is essential. This qualitative study aimed to link public perceived barriers to a) taking up the offer of population genomic screening for breast or prostate cancer risk and b) taking up risk-management options following their result, with possible theory-informed behaviour-change approaches that may support implementation. Ten focus groups were conducted with a total of 25 members of the Australian public to identify and then categorise barriers within the behaviour-change Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behaviour (COM-B) model. Ten COM-B categorised barriers were identified as perceived influences on an individual's intentions to take-up the offer, including Capability (e.g., low public awareness), Opportunity (e.g., inconvenient sample collection procedure) and Motivation (e.g., genomic screening not perceived as relevant to an individual). Ten barriers for taking up risk-management options included Motivation (e.g., concerns about adverse health impact) and Opportunity (e.g., social opportunity and cost incurred to the individual). Our findings demonstrate that a nuanced approach is required to support people to take-up the offer of population genomic screening and, where appropriate, to adopt risk-management options. Even amongst participants who were enthusiastic about a population genomic screening program, needs were varied, demanding a range of implementation strategies. Promulgating equitable uptake of genomic screening and management options for breast and prostate cancer risk will require a needs-based approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":12016,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Human Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Human Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-024-01729-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As the possibility of implementing population genomic screening programs for the risk of developing hereditary cancers in health systems increases, understanding how to support individuals who wish to have genomic screening is essential. This qualitative study aimed to link public perceived barriers to a) taking up the offer of population genomic screening for breast or prostate cancer risk and b) taking up risk-management options following their result, with possible theory-informed behaviour-change approaches that may support implementation. Ten focus groups were conducted with a total of 25 members of the Australian public to identify and then categorise barriers within the behaviour-change Capability, Opportunity, Motivation - Behaviour (COM-B) model. Ten COM-B categorised barriers were identified as perceived influences on an individual's intentions to take-up the offer, including Capability (e.g., low public awareness), Opportunity (e.g., inconvenient sample collection procedure) and Motivation (e.g., genomic screening not perceived as relevant to an individual). Ten barriers for taking up risk-management options included Motivation (e.g., concerns about adverse health impact) and Opportunity (e.g., social opportunity and cost incurred to the individual). Our findings demonstrate that a nuanced approach is required to support people to take-up the offer of population genomic screening and, where appropriate, to adopt risk-management options. Even amongst participants who were enthusiastic about a population genomic screening program, needs were varied, demanding a range of implementation strategies. Promulgating equitable uptake of genomic screening and management options for breast and prostate cancer risk will require a needs-based approach.
期刊介绍:
The European Journal of Human Genetics is the official journal of the European Society of Human Genetics, publishing high-quality, original research papers, short reports and reviews in the rapidly expanding field of human genetics and genomics. It covers molecular, clinical and cytogenetics, interfacing between advanced biomedical research and the clinician, and bridging the great diversity of facilities, resources and viewpoints in the genetics community.
Key areas include:
-Monogenic and multifactorial disorders
-Development and malformation
-Hereditary cancer
-Medical Genomics
-Gene mapping and functional studies
-Genotype-phenotype correlations
-Genetic variation and genome diversity
-Statistical and computational genetics
-Bioinformatics
-Advances in diagnostics
-Therapy and prevention
-Animal models
-Genetic services
-Community genetics