职场福利还是陷阱?遗传咨询师对工作场所基因检测的观点和经验的定性研究

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Elizabeth Charnysh, Katherine Hendy, Kerry Ryan, Anya E. R. Prince, W. Gregory Feero, Alyx Vogle, Sarah McCain, Alexandra Truhlar, J. Scott Roberts, Charles Lee, Kunal Sanghavi, Wendy R. Uhlmann, the INSIGHT @ Work Consortium
{"title":"职场福利还是陷阱?遗传咨询师对工作场所基因检测的观点和经验的定性研究","authors":"Elizabeth Charnysh,&nbsp;Katherine Hendy,&nbsp;Kerry Ryan,&nbsp;Anya E. R. Prince,&nbsp;W. Gregory Feero,&nbsp;Alyx Vogle,&nbsp;Sarah McCain,&nbsp;Alexandra Truhlar,&nbsp;J. Scott Roberts,&nbsp;Charles Lee,&nbsp;Kunal Sanghavi,&nbsp;Wendy R. Uhlmann,&nbsp;the INSIGHT @ Work Consortium","doi":"10.1002/jgc4.70016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Some employers offer genetic testing for increased cancer and cardiovascular disease risk, as well as pharmacogenetic variants, as a wellness benefit, which presents unique considerations for genetic counseling. Our ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of genomics study, positioned in a post-positivist paradigm, aimed to qualitatively assess the perspectives and experiences of genetic counselors (GCs) who had counseled on workplace genetic testing (wGT). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 US GCs who either worked in the wGT industry (i.e., role-directed wGT experience) or provided post-test counseling in a clinical setting (i.e., patient-directed wGT experience). Interviews were analyzed following the principles of codebook thematic analysis using a codebook developed from key domains from the interview guide and emergent themes that were identified during data collection. De-identified transcripts were double-coded. Both role-directed and patient-directed GCs recognized the potential benefits of wGT such as increasing access to genetic services and thereby improving health outcomes. However, patient-directed GCs had more concerns about the lack of access to follow-up care and increasing healthcare disparities. Role-directed GCs were generally more supportive of wGT and were more likely to endorse the benefits. Overall, both role- and patient-directed GCs emphasized the need for guardrails, particularly adequate pre- and post-test education, to mitigate potential harms of wGT, such as lack of informed decision-making, psychological distress, false reassurance, and decisional regret. GCs spontaneously drew parallels between wGT and population genomic screening efforts, noting that wGT similarly attempts to increase access to genetic testing for the general population. GCs' perspectives on strategies to maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of wGT may inform ELSI considerations when developing population genomic screening efforts and other programs that aim to expand access to genetic testing for the general population.</p>","PeriodicalId":54829,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","volume":"34 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jgc4.70016","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Workplace perk or pitfall? A qualitative study of genetic counselors' perspectives and experiences with workplace genetic testing\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth Charnysh,&nbsp;Katherine Hendy,&nbsp;Kerry Ryan,&nbsp;Anya E. R. Prince,&nbsp;W. Gregory Feero,&nbsp;Alyx Vogle,&nbsp;Sarah McCain,&nbsp;Alexandra Truhlar,&nbsp;J. Scott Roberts,&nbsp;Charles Lee,&nbsp;Kunal Sanghavi,&nbsp;Wendy R. Uhlmann,&nbsp;the INSIGHT @ Work Consortium\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jgc4.70016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Some employers offer genetic testing for increased cancer and cardiovascular disease risk, as well as pharmacogenetic variants, as a wellness benefit, which presents unique considerations for genetic counseling. Our ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of genomics study, positioned in a post-positivist paradigm, aimed to qualitatively assess the perspectives and experiences of genetic counselors (GCs) who had counseled on workplace genetic testing (wGT). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 US GCs who either worked in the wGT industry (i.e., role-directed wGT experience) or provided post-test counseling in a clinical setting (i.e., patient-directed wGT experience). Interviews were analyzed following the principles of codebook thematic analysis using a codebook developed from key domains from the interview guide and emergent themes that were identified during data collection. De-identified transcripts were double-coded. Both role-directed and patient-directed GCs recognized the potential benefits of wGT such as increasing access to genetic services and thereby improving health outcomes. However, patient-directed GCs had more concerns about the lack of access to follow-up care and increasing healthcare disparities. Role-directed GCs were generally more supportive of wGT and were more likely to endorse the benefits. Overall, both role- and patient-directed GCs emphasized the need for guardrails, particularly adequate pre- and post-test education, to mitigate potential harms of wGT, such as lack of informed decision-making, psychological distress, false reassurance, and decisional regret. GCs spontaneously drew parallels between wGT and population genomic screening efforts, noting that wGT similarly attempts to increase access to genetic testing for the general population. GCs' perspectives on strategies to maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of wGT may inform ELSI considerations when developing population genomic screening efforts and other programs that aim to expand access to genetic testing for the general population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54829,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Genetic Counseling\",\"volume\":\"34 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jgc4.70016\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Genetic Counseling\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgc4.70016\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Genetic Counseling","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jgc4.70016","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

一些雇主提供癌症和心血管疾病风险增加的基因测试,以及药物遗传变异,作为健康福利,这为遗传咨询提供了独特的考虑因素。我们的基因组学研究的伦理、法律和社会意义(ELSI)定位在后实证主义范式,旨在定性地评估遗传咨询师(GCs)对工作场所基因检测(wGT)提供咨询的观点和经验。对18名美国GCs进行了半结构化访谈,这些GCs要么在wGT行业工作(即角色导向的wGT经验),要么在临床环境中提供测试后咨询(即患者导向的wGT经验)。访谈按照代码本主题分析的原则进行分析,使用从访谈指南的关键领域开发的代码本和在数据收集期间确定的紧急主题。去识别的转录本是双重编码的。以角色为导向和以患者为导向的遗传咨询都认识到遗传咨询的潜在益处,例如增加获得遗传服务的机会,从而改善健康结果。然而,以患者为导向的GCs更关注缺乏随访护理和医疗保健差距扩大的问题。角色导向的GCs通常更支持wGT,更有可能认可wGT的好处。总的来说,角色导向和患者导向的GCs都强调需要护栏,特别是充分的测试前和测试后教育,以减轻wGT的潜在危害,如缺乏知情决策、心理困扰、虚假保证和决策后悔。GCs自发地将wGT与群体基因组筛查工作进行了比较,指出wGT同样试图增加普通人群获得基因检测的机会。GCs对wGT利益最大化和危害最小化策略的观点,可以为ELSI在发展群体基因组筛查工作和其他旨在扩大普通人群基因检测机会的项目时提供参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Workplace perk or pitfall? A qualitative study of genetic counselors' perspectives and experiences with workplace genetic testing

Workplace perk or pitfall? A qualitative study of genetic counselors' perspectives and experiences with workplace genetic testing

Some employers offer genetic testing for increased cancer and cardiovascular disease risk, as well as pharmacogenetic variants, as a wellness benefit, which presents unique considerations for genetic counseling. Our ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of genomics study, positioned in a post-positivist paradigm, aimed to qualitatively assess the perspectives and experiences of genetic counselors (GCs) who had counseled on workplace genetic testing (wGT). Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 US GCs who either worked in the wGT industry (i.e., role-directed wGT experience) or provided post-test counseling in a clinical setting (i.e., patient-directed wGT experience). Interviews were analyzed following the principles of codebook thematic analysis using a codebook developed from key domains from the interview guide and emergent themes that were identified during data collection. De-identified transcripts were double-coded. Both role-directed and patient-directed GCs recognized the potential benefits of wGT such as increasing access to genetic services and thereby improving health outcomes. However, patient-directed GCs had more concerns about the lack of access to follow-up care and increasing healthcare disparities. Role-directed GCs were generally more supportive of wGT and were more likely to endorse the benefits. Overall, both role- and patient-directed GCs emphasized the need for guardrails, particularly adequate pre- and post-test education, to mitigate potential harms of wGT, such as lack of informed decision-making, psychological distress, false reassurance, and decisional regret. GCs spontaneously drew parallels between wGT and population genomic screening efforts, noting that wGT similarly attempts to increase access to genetic testing for the general population. GCs' perspectives on strategies to maximize the benefits and minimize the harms of wGT may inform ELSI considerations when developing population genomic screening efforts and other programs that aim to expand access to genetic testing for the general population.

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
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Journal of Genetic Counseling GENETICS & HEREDITY-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
26.30%
发文量
113
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Genetic Counseling (JOGC), published for the National Society of Genetic Counselors, is a timely, international forum addressing all aspects of the discipline and practice of genetic counseling. The journal focuses on the critical questions and problems that arise at the interface between rapidly advancing technological developments and the concerns of individuals and communities at genetic risk. The publication provides genetic counselors, other clinicians and health educators, laboratory geneticists, bioethicists, legal scholars, social scientists, and other researchers with a premier resource on genetic counseling topics in national, international, and cross-national contexts.
×
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