Defining critical educational components of informed consent for genetic testing: views of US-based genetic counselors and medical geneticists
- PMID: 37308598
- PMCID: PMC10545703
- DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01401-0
Defining critical educational components of informed consent for genetic testing: views of US-based genetic counselors and medical geneticists
Abstract
The Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) Consent and Disclosure Recommendation (CADRe) framework proposes that key components of informed consent for genetic testing can be covered with a targeted discussion for many conditions rather than a time-intensive traditional genetic counseling approach. We surveyed US genetics professionals (medical geneticists and genetic counselors) on their response to scenarios that proposed core informed consent concepts for clinical genetic testing developed in a prior expert consensus process. The anonymous online survey included responses to 3 (of 6 possible) different clinical scenarios that summarized the application of the core concepts. There was a binary (yes/no) question asking respondents whether they agreed the scenarios included the minimum necessary and critical educational concepts to allow an informed decision. Respondents then provided open-ended feedback on what concepts were missing or could be removed. At least one scenario was completed by 238 respondents. For all but one scenario, over 65% of respondents agreed that the identified concepts portrayed were sufficient for an informed decision; the exome scenario had the lowest agreement (58%). Qualitative analysis of the open-ended comments showed no consistently mentioned concepts to add or remove. The level of agreement with the example scenarios suggests that the minimum critical educational components for pre-test informed consent proposed in our prior work is a reasonable starting place for targeted pre-test discussions. This may be helpful in providing consistency to the clinical practice of both genetics and non-genetics providers, meeting patients' informational needs, tailoring consent for psychosocial support, and in future guideline development.
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Human Genetics.
Conflict of interest statement
AHB has received compensation as a section editor for the
Comment in
-
No need for options for choice for unsolicited findings in informed consent for clinical genetic testing.Eur J Hum Genet. 2023 Oct;31(10):1095-1096. doi: 10.1038/s41431-023-01424-7. Epub 2023 Jul 13. Eur J Hum Genet. 2023. PMID: 37438414 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Defining the Critical Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing.J Pers Med. 2021 Dec 5;11(12):1304. doi: 10.3390/jpm11121304. J Pers Med. 2021. PMID: 34945775 Free PMC article.
-
Developing a conceptual, reproducible, rubric-based approach to consent and result disclosure for genetic testing by clinicians with minimal genetics background.Genet Med. 2019 Mar;21(3):727-735. doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0093-6. Epub 2018 Jul 6. Genet Med. 2019. PMID: 29976988 Free PMC article.
-
Genetic counselors' and community clinicians' implementation and perceived barriers to informed consent during pre-test counseling for hereditary cancer risk.J Genet Couns. 2025 Feb;34(1):e1887. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1887. Epub 2024 Mar 13. J Genet Couns. 2025. PMID: 38480478 Free PMC article.
-
Genetic Testing: Consent and Result Disclosure for Primary Care Providers.Med Clin North Am. 2019 Nov;103(6):967-976. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2019.07.001. Epub 2019 Aug 20. Med Clin North Am. 2019. PMID: 31582007 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Informed Consent in the Genomics Era.Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2020 Aug 3;10(8):a036582. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a036582. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2020. PMID: 31570382 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Perceived understanding and psychosocial outcomes: employees' responses to learning results of workplace genetic testing.Per Med. 2025 Aug;22(4):211-221. doi: 10.1080/17410541.2025.2515003. Epub 2025 Jun 11. Per Med. 2025. PMID: 40497788
-
Predictive testing for Huntington's disease in a digital age; patient power with potential pitfalls.Eur J Hum Genet. 2025 Jun;33(6):695-698. doi: 10.1038/s41431-025-01793-1. Epub 2025 Jan 29. Eur J Hum Genet. 2025. PMID: 39880983 Free PMC article.
-
Expanding what we know about rare genetic diseases.Eur J Hum Genet. 2023 Oct;31(10):1091-1092. doi: 10.1038/s41431-023-01453-2. Eur J Hum Genet. 2023. PMID: 37783763 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
No need for options for choice for unsolicited findings in informed consent for clinical genetic testing.Eur J Hum Genet. 2023 Oct;31(10):1095-1096. doi: 10.1038/s41431-023-01424-7. Epub 2023 Jul 13. Eur J Hum Genet. 2023. PMID: 37438414 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Genomic sequencing in newborn screening: balancing consent with the right of the asymptomatic at-risk child to be found.Eur J Hum Genet. 2025 Mar;33(2):182-188. doi: 10.1038/s41431-024-01677-w. Epub 2024 Aug 12. Eur J Hum Genet. 2025. PMID: 39134767 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources