A Population-Based Survey in Australia of Men’s and Women’s Perceptions of Genetic Risk and Predictive Genetic Testing and Implications for Primary Care

Abstract

Background: Community attitudes research regarding genetic issues is important when contemplating the potential value and utilisation of predictive testing for common diseases in mainstream health services. This article aims to report population-based attitudes and discuss their relevance to integrating genetic services in primary health contexts. Methods: Men’s and women’s attitudes were investigated via population-based omnibus telephone survey in Queensland, Australia. Randomly selected adults (n = 1,230) with a mean age of 48.8 years were interviewed regarding perceptions of genetic determinants of health; benefits of genetic testing that predict ‘certain’ versus ‘probable’ future illness; and concern, if any, regarding potential misuse of genetic test information. Results: Most (75%) respondents believed genetic factors significantly influenced health status; 85% regarded genetic testing positively although attitudes varied with age. Risk-based information was less valued than certainty-based information, but women valued risk information significantly more highly than men. Respondents reported ‘concern’ (44%) and ‘no concern’ (47%) regarding potential misuse of genetic information. Conclusions: This study contributes important population-based data as most research has involved selected individuals closely impacted by genetic disorders. While community attitudes were positive regarding genetic testing, genetic literacy is important to establish. The nature of gender differences regarding risk perception merits further study and has policy and service implications. Community concern about potential genetic discrimination must be addressed if health benefits of testing are to be maximised. Larger questions remain in scientific, policy, service delivery, and professional practice domains before predictive testing for common disorders is efficacious in mainstream health care.

Attitudes to incorporating genomic risk assessments into population screening programs: the importance of purpose, context and deliberation

“…The issue of the utility of the genetic information seems to be central to individuals’ evaluations of genomic profiling. In a previous publication on this topic [ 21 ] in which we reported the results of qualitative analyses, we discussed how parental evaluations of the utility of genomic profiling for T1DM risk were associated with perceptions of the condition’s preventability. In the present study, the purpose of risk prediction for T1DM was framed not as prevention of the condition, but rather early identification of symptoms that may prevent clinical manifestation of severe outcomes such as keto-acidosis at diagnosis.…”

The Moral Reasoning of Genetic Dilemmas Amongst Jewish Israeli Undergraduate Students with Different Religious Affiliations and Scientific Backgrounds

“…Gender has been found to influence ethical decision making (Beekun et al 2010;Curtis et al 2012;Jaffee and Hyde 2000;Rothbart et al 1986). as well as risk preference (Taylor 2011). with women having been found to be less risk seeking than men (Powell and Ansic 1997).…”

The impact of multiplex genetic testing on disease risk perceptions

“…Most people hold misconceptions about the nature and limitations of genetic tests , and misinterpret genetic test results . These findings may represent a natural process predicted by fuzzy‐trace theory , whereby the default mode of encoding numerical risk information is by ‘fuzzy’, gist representations, capturing the global meaning of risks, which is based, among other factors, on a person's culture, education, and experience .…”