Genetic risk estimation by healthcare professionals

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether healthcare professionals correctly incorporate the relevance of a favourable test outcome in a close relative when determining the level of risk for individuals at risk for Huntington's disease. DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey of clinical geneticists and genetic counsellors from 12 centres of clinical genetics (United Kingdom, 6; The Netherlands, 4; Italy, 1; Australia, 1) in May-June 2002. Participants were asked to assess risk of specific individuals in 10 pedigrees, three of which required use of Bayes' theorem. PARTICIPANTS: 71 clinical geneticists and 41 other hea... Mehr ...

Verfasser: Bonke, B. (Benno)
Tibben, A. (Arend)
Lindhout, D. (Dick)
Clarke, A.J. (Angus)
Stijnen, Th. (Theo)
Dokumenttyp: Artikel
Erscheinungsdatum: 2005
Schlagwörter: Australia / Bayes Theorem / Clinical Competence / Genetic Screening/*utilization / Genetic Services/*statistics & numerical data / Great Britain / Humans / Huntington Disease/*diagnosis/*genetics / Italy / Netherlands / Pedigree / Probability Theory / Risk Assessment/methods/statistics & numerical data
Sprache: Englisch
Permalink: https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-29198474
Datenquelle: BASE; Originalkatalog
Powered By: BASE
Link(s) : http://repub.eur.nl/pub/10374

OBJECTIVES: To assess whether healthcare professionals correctly incorporate the relevance of a favourable test outcome in a close relative when determining the level of risk for individuals at risk for Huntington's disease. DESIGN AND SETTING: Survey of clinical geneticists and genetic counsellors from 12 centres of clinical genetics (United Kingdom, 6; The Netherlands, 4; Italy, 1; Australia, 1) in May-June 2002. Participants were asked to assess risk of specific individuals in 10 pedigrees, three of which required use of Bayes' theorem. PARTICIPANTS: 71 clinical geneticists and 41 other healthcare professionals involved in genetic counselling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of respondents correctly assessing risk in the three target pedigrees; proportion of respondents who were confident of their estimate. RESULTS: 50%-64% of respondents (for the three targets separately) did not include the favourable test information and inco