Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Nov;15(11):873-81.
doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.63. Epub 2013 May 30.

Return of incidental findings in genomic medicine: measuring what patients value--development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generation testing (IMPRINT)

Caroline Savage Bennette  1 , Susan Brown Trinidad, Stephanie M Fullerton, Donald Patrick, Laura Amendola, Wylie Burke, Fuki M Hisama, Gail P Jarvik, Dean A Regier, David L Veenstra
Affiliations

Return of incidental findings in genomic medicine: measuring what patients value--development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generation testing (IMPRINT)

Caroline Savage Bennette et al. Genet Med. 2013 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: Little is known about the factors that influence patients' preferences for the return of incidental findings from genome sequencing. This study identified attributes of incidental findings that were important to patients and developed a discrete-choice experiment instrument to quantify patient preferences.

Methods: An initial set of key attributes and attribute levels was developed from a literature review and in consultation with experts. The attributes' salience and communication were refined using focus group methodology (n = 12) and cognitive interviews (n = 6) with patients who had received conventional genetic testing for familial colorectal cancer or polyposis syndromes. The attributes and levels used in the hypothetical choices presented to participants were identified using validated experimental design techniques.

Results: The final discrete-choice experiment instrument incorporates the following attributes and levels: lifetime risk of disease (5, 40, 70%); disease treatability (medical, lifestyle, none); disease severity (mild, moderate, severe); carrier status (yes, no); drug response likelihood (high, moderate, none); and test cost ($250, $425, $1,000, $1,900).

Conclusion: Patient preferences for incidental genomic findings are likely influenced by a complex set of diverse attributes. Quantification of patient preferences can inform patient-provider communication by highlighting the attributes of incidental findings that matter most to patients and warrant further discussion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart of development process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure 2A. Example of choice task from initial draft of discrete choice experiment. Figure 2B. Example of choice task from final draft of discrete choice experiment for colorectal cancer results.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Example of choice task from final draft of discrete choice experiment for incidental findings.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ashley EA, Butte AJ, Wheeler MT, et al. Clinical assessment incorporating a personal genome. Lancet. 2010 May 1;375(9725):1525–1535. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Knoppers BM, Joly Y, Simard J, Durocher F. The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006 Nov;14(11):1170–1178. - PubMed
    1. Grosse SD, Khoury MJ. What is the clinical utility of genetic testing? Genet Med. 2006 Jul;8(7):448–450. - PubMed
    1. Sargent D. Genomic classifiers in colon cancer - clinical utility. Gastrointest Cancer Res. 2008 Jul;2(4 Suppl):S35–37. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Berwick DM, Weinstein MC. What do patients value? Willingness to pay for ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Med Care. 1985 Jul;23(7):881–893. - PubMed

Publication types