Preferences for genetic testing among populations underrepresented in genomic research: a systematic review.

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q2 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
Taylor Montgomery, Madison R Hickingbotham, Hadley Stevens Smith
{"title":"Preferences for genetic testing among populations underrepresented in genomic research: a systematic review.","authors":"Taylor Montgomery, Madison R Hickingbotham, Hadley Stevens Smith","doi":"10.1038/s41431-025-01819-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Equitable implementation of genomic medicine requires understanding preferences of diverse populations. Stated preference methods, such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs) and conjoint analyses, allow empirical evaluation of whether and how preferences for aspects of genomic medicine tests and services differ according to demographic characteristics. We aimed to understand the extent to which stated preference research in genomic medicine includes respondents that are population representative and evidence regarding preference heterogeneity by race and ethnicity. We conducted a systematic review of the stated preference literature in genomic medicine. We searched Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS for articles published from February 2021 to November 2023, extending a previously published systematic review. We extracted information on whether demographic characteristics of respondents were reported, whether investigators tested for preference heterogeneity based on race and ethnicity, and whether preference heterogeneity by race and ethnicity was identified. We identified 138 newly published records in addition to the 38 articles included in the original review. In total, we included 18 articles that reported participants' race or ethnicity. Eight articles explicitly analyzed preferences by race and ethnicity, and preference heterogeneity was identified in two. Stated preference research in genomic medicine often does not include population representative samples, and preference heterogeneity is not frequently analyzed according to race and ethnicity. Improving the representativeness of respondent populations, which allows for better understanding of whether and how preferences may differ by population subgroups, is important to guide policy and implementation decisions in genomic medicine.</p>","PeriodicalId":12016,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Human Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","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/s41431-025-01819-8","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

Equitable implementation of genomic medicine requires understanding preferences of diverse populations. Stated preference methods, such as discrete choice experiments (DCEs) and conjoint analyses, allow empirical evaluation of whether and how preferences for aspects of genomic medicine tests and services differ according to demographic characteristics. We aimed to understand the extent to which stated preference research in genomic medicine includes respondents that are population representative and evidence regarding preference heterogeneity by race and ethnicity. We conducted a systematic review of the stated preference literature in genomic medicine. We searched Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS for articles published from February 2021 to November 2023, extending a previously published systematic review. We extracted information on whether demographic characteristics of respondents were reported, whether investigators tested for preference heterogeneity based on race and ethnicity, and whether preference heterogeneity by race and ethnicity was identified. We identified 138 newly published records in addition to the 38 articles included in the original review. In total, we included 18 articles that reported participants' race or ethnicity. Eight articles explicitly analyzed preferences by race and ethnicity, and preference heterogeneity was identified in two. Stated preference research in genomic medicine often does not include population representative samples, and preference heterogeneity is not frequently analyzed according to race and ethnicity. Improving the representativeness of respondent populations, which allows for better understanding of whether and how preferences may differ by population subgroups, is important to guide policy and implementation decisions in genomic medicine.

在基因组研究中代表性不足的人群中对基因检测的偏好:一项系统综述。
公平实施基因组医学需要了解不同人群的偏好。说明的偏好方法,如离散选择实验和联合分析,允许对基因组医学测试和服务方面的偏好是否以及如何根据人口特征而有所不同进行实证评估。我们的目的是了解基因组医学中陈述的偏好研究在多大程度上包括具有人口代表性的受访者,以及关于种族和民族偏好异质性的证据。我们对基因组医学中陈述的偏好文献进行了系统回顾。我们检索了Web of Science、CINAHL、PsycINFO、PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library和SCOPUS,检索了从2021年2月至2023年11月发表的文章,扩展了之前发表的系统综述。我们提取了关于是否报告了受访者的人口统计学特征、调查人员是否测试了基于种族和民族的偏好异质性以及是否确定了种族和民族的偏好异质性的信息。除了原始综述中包含的38篇文章外,我们还确定了138篇新发表的记录。我们总共纳入了18篇报道参与者种族的文章。八篇文章明确分析了种族和民族的偏好,其中两篇文章确定了偏好异质性。基因组医学中陈述的偏好研究通常不包括人口代表性样本,偏好异质性也不经常根据种族和民族进行分析。提高应答人群的代表性,可以更好地了解不同人群的偏好是否不同以及如何不同,这对指导基因组医学的政策和实施决策非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Human Genetics
European Journal of Human Genetics 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
5.80%
发文量
216
审稿时长
2 months
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
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信