Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases

Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases CLINICIAN’S CORNER REVIEW Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases A Systematic Review Maren T. Scheuner, MD, MPH Context The greatest public health benefit of advances in understanding the hu- Pauline Sieverding, MPA, JD, PhD man genome may be realized for common chronic diseases such as cardiovascular dis- ease, diabetes mellitus, and cancer. Attempts to integrate such knowledge into clini- Paul G. Shekelle, MD, PhD cal practice are still in the early stages, and as a result, many questions surround the HE GREATEST PUBLIC HEALTH BEN- current state of this translation. efit of advances in understand- Objective To synthesize current information on genetic health services for common ing the human genome will adult-onset conditions by examining studies that have addressed the outcomes, con- Tlikely occur as genomic medi- sumer information needs, delivery, and challenges in integrating these services. cine expands its focus from rare genetic Data Sources MEDLINE articles published between January 2000 and February 2008. disorders to inclusion of more common Study Selection Original research articles and systematic reviews dealing with com- chronic diseases, such as coronary heart mon chronic adult-onset conditions were reviewed. A total of 3371 citations were re- disease, stroke, diabetes mellitus, and http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA American Medical Association

Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases

Scheuner, Maren T.; Sieverding, Pauline; Shekelle, Paul G.
JAMA , Volume 299 (11) – Mar 19, 2008
Download PDF
15 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/delivery-of-genomic-medicine-for-common-chronic-adult-diseases-LI7c9We3b9
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved. Applicable FARS/DFARS Restrictions Apply to Government Use.
ISSN
0098-7484
eISSN
1538-3598
DOI
10.1001/jama.299.11.1320
pmid
18349093
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

CLINICIAN’S CORNER REVIEW Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases A Systematic Review Maren T. Scheuner, MD, MPH Context The greatest public health benefit of advances in understanding the hu- Pauline Sieverding, MPA, JD, PhD man genome may be realized for common chronic diseases such as cardiovascular dis- ease, diabetes mellitus, and cancer. Attempts to integrate such knowledge into clini- Paul G. Shekelle, MD, PhD cal practice are still in the early stages, and as a result, many questions surround the HE GREATEST PUBLIC HEALTH BEN- current state of this translation. efit of advances in understand- Objective To synthesize current information on genetic health services for common ing the human genome will adult-onset conditions by examining studies that have addressed the outcomes, con- Tlikely occur as genomic medi- sumer information needs, delivery, and challenges in integrating these services. cine expands its focus from rare genetic Data Sources MEDLINE articles published between January 2000 and February 2008. disorders to inclusion of more common Study Selection Original research articles and systematic reviews dealing with com- chronic diseases, such as coronary heart mon chronic adult-onset conditions were reviewed. A total of 3371 citations were re- disease, stroke, diabetes mellitus, and

Journal

JAMA – American Medical Association

Published: Mar 19, 2008

References

  • A systematic review of perceived risks, psychological and behavioral impacts of genetic testing.
    Heshka, JT; Palleschi, C; Howley, H; Wilson, B; Wells, PS
  • Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: a systematic review.
    Butow, PN; Lobb, EA; Meiser, B; Barratt, A; Tucker, KM
  • Is information on genetic determinants of obesity helpful or harmful for obese people? a randomized clinical trial.
    Rief, W; Conradt, M; Dierk, JM
  • More good than harm: a randomised controlled trial of the effect of education about familial risk of diabetes on psychological outcomes.
    Pierce, M; Ridout, D; Harding, D; Keen, H; Bradley, C
  • Familial risk and colorectal cancer screening health beliefs and attitudes in an insured population.
    Palmer, RC; Emmons, KM; Fletcher, RH
  • Cancer worries, risk perceptions and associations with interest in DNA testing and clinic satisfaction in a familial colorectal cancer clinic.
    Collins, V; Halliday, J; Warren, R; Williamson, R
  • Cancer genetic counseling: communication and counselees' post-visit satisfaction, cognitions, anxiety, and needs fulfillment.
    Pieterse, AH; van Dulmen, AM; Beemer, FA; Bensing, JM; Ausems, MG
  • Genetic risk and behavioural change.
    Marteau, TM; Lerman, C
  • Physician exposure to and attitudes toward advertisements for genetic tests for inherited cancer susceptibility.
    Vadaparampil, ST; Wideroff, L; Olson, L; Viswanath, K; Freedman, AN
  • Primary care physicians' concerns about offering a genetic test to tailor smoking cessation treatment.
    Levy, DE; Youatt, EJ; Shields, AE
  • Predictive genetics in primary care: expectations for the motivational impact of genetic testing affects the importance family physicians place on screening for familial cancer risk.
    Gramling, R; Nash, J; Siren, K; Culpepper, L
  • Patient preferences for pharmacogenetic screening in depression.
    Herbild, L; Gyrd-Hansen, D; Bech, M
  • Outcome of preventive surgery and screening for breast and ovarian cancer in BRCA mutation carriers.
    Scheuer, L; Kauff, N; Robson, M
  • Improved weight management using genetic information to personalize a calorie controlled diet.
    Arkadianos, I; Valdes, AM; Marinos, E; Florou, A; Gill, RD; Grimaldi, KA
  • Randomized trial of genotype-guided versus standard warfarin dosing in patients initiating oral anticoagulation.
    Anderson, JL; Horne, BD; Stevens, SM
  • The counsellees' view of an unclassified variant in BRCA1/2: recall, interpretation, and impact on life [published online ahead of print December 21, 2007].
    Vos, J; Otten, W; van Asperen, C; Jansen, A; Menko, F; Tibben, A
  • Perceived genetic knowledge, attitudes towards genetic testing, and the relationship between these among patients with a chronic disease.
    Morren, M; Rijken, M; Baanders, AN; Bensing, J
  • The general public's information needs and perceptions regarding hereditary cancer: an application of the Integrated Change Model.
    de Vries, H; Mesters, I; van de Steeg, H; Honing, C
  • The association between race and attitudes about predictive genetic testing.
    Peters, N; Rose, A; Armstrong, K
  • Beliefs and interest in cancer risk in an underserved Latino cohort.
    Ricker, CN; Hiyama, S; Fuentes, S
  • The impact of acculturation on awareness of genetic testing for increased cancer risk among Hispanics in the year 2000 National Health Interview Survey.
    Vadaparampil, ST; Wideroff, L; Breen, N; Trapido, E
  • Patient acceptability of genotypic testing for hemochromatosis in primary care.
    Anderson, RT; Press, N; Tucker, DC
  • Colorectal cancer survivors undergoing genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivational factors and psychosocial functioning.
    Esplen, MJ; Madlensky, L; Aronson, M
  • Knowledge and attitudes about microsatellite instability testing among high-risk individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer.
    Manne, SL; Chung, DC; Weinberg, DS
  • Barriers to participating in genetic counseling and BRCA testing during primary treatment for breast cancer.
    Schlich-Bakker, KJ; ten Kroode, HF; Warlam-Rodenhuis, CC; van den Bout, J; Ausems, MG
  • Information needs of mothers regarding communicating BRCA1/2 cancer genetic test results to their children.
    Tercyak, KP; Peshkin, BN; Demarco, TA
  • Women's interest in gene expression analysis for breast cancer recurrence risk.
    O’Neill, SC; Brewer, NT; Lillie, SE
  • Lay understanding of familial risk of common chronic diseases: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research.
    Walter, FM; Emery, J; Braithwaite, D; Marteau, TM
  • ‘Coming down the line’: patients' understanding of their family history of common chronic disease.
    Walter, FM; Emery, J
  • Referral to cancer genetic counseling: are there stages of readiness?
    O’Neill, SM; Peters, JA; Vogel, VG; Feingold, E; Rubinstein, WS
  • Communication in cancer genetic counselling: does it reflect counselees' previsit needs and preferences?
    Pieterse, AH; van Dulmen, AM; Ausems, MG; Beemer, FA; Bensing, JM
  • Goals, benefits, and outcomes of genetic counseling: client and genetic counselor assessment.
    Bernhardt, BA; Biesecker, BB; Mastromarino, CL
  • The state of the medical geneticist workforce: findings of the 2003 survey of American Board of Medical Genetics certified geneticists.
    Cooksey, JA; Forte, G; Benkendorf, J; Blitzer, MG
  • The medical genetics workforce: an analysis of clinical geneticist subgroups.
    Cooksey, JA; Forte, G; Flanagan, PA; Benkendorf, J; Blitzer, MG
  • The practice of clinical genetics: a survey of practitioners.
    Pletcher, BA; Jewett, EA; Cull, WL
  • US genetics nurses in advanced practice.
    Lea, DH; Williams, JK; Cooksey, JA; Flanagan, PA; Forte, G; Blitzer, MG
  • Integrated regional genetic services: current and future provision.
    Donnai, D; Elles, R
  • Genetic susceptibility to cancer: family physicians' experience.
    Carroll, JC; Brown, JB; Blaine, S; Glendon, G; Pugh, P; Medved, W
  • Patient satisfaction with two different models of cancer genetic services in south-east Scotland.
    Holloway, S; Porteous, M; Cetnarskyj, R
  • Feasibility and acceptability of providing nurse counsellor genetics clinics in primary care.
    Westwood, G; Pickering, RM; Latter, S; Lucassen, A; Little, P; Karen Temple, I
  • Genetics support to primary care practitioners: a demonstration project.
    Drury, N; Bethea, J; Guilbert, P; Qureshi, N
  • Reactions of GPs to a triage-controlled referral system for cancer genetics.
    Elwyn, G; Iredale, R; Gray, J
  • Guidelines for referral to a regional genetics service: GPs respond by referring more appropriate cases.
    Lucassen, A; Watson, E; Harcourt, J; Rose, P; O’Grady, J
  • Randomized comparison of phone versus in-person BRCA1/2 predisposition genetic test result disclosure counseling.
    Jenkins, J; Calzone, KA; Dimond, E
  • Telegenetics in Maine: successful clinical and educational service delivery model developed from a 3-year pilot project.
    Lea, DH; Johnson, JL; Ellingwood, S; Allan, W; Patel, A; Smith, R
  • The GRAIDS Trial: a cluster randomised controlled trial of computer decision support for the management of familial cancer risk in primary care.
    Emery, J; Morris, H; Goodchild, R
  • Nutrigenetic testing: tests purchased from four Web sites mislead consumers: testimony before the Special Committee on Aging, US Senate, July 27, 2006 [GAO-06-977T].
    Kutz, G
  • Awareness and use of direct-to-consumer nutrigenomic tests, United States, 2006.
    Goddard, KA; Moore, C; Ottman, D; Szegda, KL; Bradley, L; Khoury, MJ
  • Barriers to the provision of genetic services by primary care physicians: a systematic review of the literature.
    Suther, S; Goodson, P
  • The gap between practice and genetics education of health professionals: HuGEM survey results.
    Lapham, EV; Kozma, C; Weiss, JO; Benkendorf, JL; Wilson, MA
  • Obstetrician-gynecologists' opinions and attitudes on the role of genetics in women's health.
    Wilkins-Haug, L; Erickson, K; Hill, L; Power, M; Holzman, GB; Schulkin, J
  • US physicians' attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer susceptibility.
    Freedman, AN; Wideroff, L; Olson, L
  • Family physician self-efficacy with screening for inherited cancer risk.
    Gramling, R; Nash, J; Siren, K; Eaton, C; Culpepper, L
  • Knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes of advanced practice nursing students regarding medical genetics.
    Maradiegue, A; Edwards, QT; Seibert, D; Macri, C; Sitzer, L
  • Public health genomics knowledge and attitudes: a survey of public health educators in the United States.
    Chen, LS; Goodson, P
  • Deficient knowledge of genetics relevant for daily practice among medical students nearing graduation.
    Baars, MJ; Scherpbier, AJ; Schuwirth, LW
  • Needs assessment study of genetics education for general practitioners in Australia.
    Metcalfe, S; Hurworth, R; Newstead, J; Robins, R
  • Does knowledge about the genetics of breast cancer differ between nongeneticist physicians who do or do not discuss or order BRCA testing?
    Doksum, T; Bernhardt, BA; Holtzman, NA
  • Physician use of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: results of a national survey.
    Wideroff, L; Freedman, AN; Olson, L
  • Reporting BRCA test results to primary care physicians.
    Sandhaus, LM; Singer, ME; Dawson, NV; Wiesner, GL
  • Identification and referral of families at high risk for cancer susceptibility.
    Sweet, KM; Bradley, TL; Westman, JA
  • The genetic family history as a risk assessment tool in internal medicine.
    Frezzo, TM; Rubinstein, WS; Dunham, D; Ormond, KE
  • Cancer risk assessment: quality and impact of the family history interview.
    Murff, HJ; Byrne, D; Syngal, S
  • Oversight of US genetic testing laboratories.
    Hudson, KL; Murphy, JA; Kaufman, DJ; Javitt, GH; Katsanis, SH; Scott, J
  • Laws restricting health insurers' use of genetic information: impact on genetic discrimination.
    Hall, MA; Rich, SS
  • Patients' fear of genetic discrimination by health insurers: the impact of legal protections.
    Hall, MA; Rich, SS
  • Concerns in a primary care population about genetic discrimination by insurers.
    Hall, MA; McEwen, JE; Barton, JC
  • Genetic screening for iron overload: no evidence of discrimination at 1 year.
    Hall, MA; Barton, JC; Adams, PC