Impact of public exhibition on the perception of birthmarks.

BACKGROUND: The importance of photographs in social media, the steep rise in popularity of tattoos, and the prominence of individuals with visibly different skin in fashion are likely to be changing the landscape of self- and public perception of birthmarks. Study objectives were to assess the impact of a photoshoot and public exhibition on the self-perception of individuals with extensive birthmarks, and to explore the viewing public's reactions. METHODS: Thirty individuals with congenital melanocytic nevi (CMN) were recruited internationally. Each had a professional photoshoot portrait with their skin exposed, resulting in a public exhibition in London entitled "How do you C Me Now?" Participants/parents completed pre- and post-questionnaires relating to self-perception and the impact of their birthmarks on behavior. Over 8000 members of the public viewed the exhibition, 464 completing an on-site questionnaire on its effects. RESULTS: All participants/parents rated the experience as positive, valuable and helpful. Scores on self-appreciation and self-confidence were significantly higher after the photo shoot. Members of the general public overwhelmingly reported the exhibition increased their positive feelings towards people with birthmarks. The majority of public respondents also reported that the exhibition made them feel better about their own skin and about their looks in general. CONCLUSION: This unique exhibition and the associated research has provided a striking new perspective on potential psychological interventions for individuals with birthmarks.

The Genomic Medicine Integrative Research Framework: A Conceptual Framework for Conducting Genomic Medicine Research.

Conceptual frameworks are useful in research because they can highlight priority research domains, inform decisions about interventions, identify outcomes and factors to measure, and display how factors might relate to each other to generate and test hypotheses. Discovery, translational, and implementation research are all critical to the overall mission of genomic medicine and prevention, but they have yet to be organized into a unified conceptual framework. To fill this gap, our diverse team collaborated to develop the Genomic Medicine Integrative Research (GMIR) Framework, a simple but comprehensive tool to aid the genomics community in developing research questions, strategies, and measures and in integrating genomic medicine and prevention into clinical practice. Here we present the GMIR Framework and its development, along with examples of its use for research development, demonstrating how we applied it to select and harmonize measures for use across diverse genomic medicine implementation projects. Researchers can utilize the GMIR Framework for their own research, collaborative investigations, and clinical implementation efforts; clinicians can use it to establish and evaluate programs; and all stakeholders can use it to help allocate resources and make sure that the full complexity of etiology is included in research and program design, development, and evaluation.

Decision-making, attitudes, and understanding among patients and relatives invited to undergo genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project: A multisite survey study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess decisions, attitudes, and understanding of participants (patients, parents, relatives) having genome sequencing for rare disease diagnosis. METHODS: This study involved a cross-sectional observational survey with participants in the 100,000 Genomes Project. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 51% (504/978). Most participants self-reported that they had decided to undergo genome sequencing (94%) and that this was an informed decision (84%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Most self-reported that they had chosen to receive additional findings (88%) and that this was an informed decision (89%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Participants were motivated more by the desire to help others via research than by the belief it would help them obtain a diagnosis (Z = 14.23, P = 5.75 × 10-46), although both motivations were high. Concerns were relatively few but, where expressed, were more about the potential psychological impact of results than data sharing/access (Z = 9.61, P = 7.65 × 10-22). Concerns were higher among male, Asian or Asian British, and more religious participants. General and context-specific understanding of genome sequencing were both moderately high (means 5.2/9.0 and 22.5/28.0, respectively). CONCLUSION: These findings are useful to inform consent guidelines and clinical implementation of genome sequencing.

Public Attitudes toward Consent and Data Sharing in Biobank Research: A Large Multi-site Experimental Survey in the US.

Individuals participating in biobanks and other large research projects are increasingly asked to provide broad consent for open-ended research use and widespread sharing of their biosamples and data. We assessed willingness to participate in a biobank using different consent and data sharing models, hypothesizing that willingness would be higher under more restrictive scenarios. Perceived benefits, concerns, and information needs were also assessed. In this experimental survey, individuals from 11 US healthcare systems in the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network were randomly allocated to one of three hypothetical scenarios: tiered consent and controlled data sharing; broad consent and controlled data sharing; or broad consent and open data sharing. Of 82,328 eligible individuals, exactly 13,000 (15.8%) completed the survey. Overall, 66% (95% CI: 63%-69%) of population-weighted respondents stated they would be willing to participate in a biobank; willingness and attitudes did not differ between respondents in the three scenarios. Willingness to participate was associated with self-identified white race, higher educational attainment, lower religiosity, perceiving more research benefits, fewer concerns, and fewer information needs. Most (86%, CI: 84%-87%) participants would want to know what would happen if a researcher misused their health information; fewer (51%, CI: 47%-55%) would worry about their privacy. The concern that the use of broad consent and open data sharing could adversely affect participant recruitment is not supported by these findings. Addressing potential participants' concerns and information needs and building trust and relationships with communities may increase acceptance of broad consent and wide data sharing in biobank research.

Opening the "black box" of informed consent appointments for genome sequencing: a multisite observational study.

PURPOSE: Little is known about how health-care professionals communicate with patients about consenting to genome sequencing. We therefore examined what topics health-care professionals covered and what questions patients asked during consent conversations. METHODS: Twenty-one genome sequencing consent appointments were audio recorded and analyzed. Participants were 35 individuals being invited to participate in the 100,000 Genomes Project (14 participants with rare diseases, 21 relatives), and 10 health-care professionals ("consenters"). RESULTS: Two-thirds of participants' questions were substantive (e.g., genetics and inheritance); one-third administrative (e.g., filling in the consent form). Consenters usually (19/21) emphasized participant choice about secondary findings, but less often (13/21) emphasized the uncertainty about associated disease risks. Consenters primarily used passive statements and closed-ended, rather than open-ended, questions to invite participants' questions and concerns. In two appointments, one parent expressed negative or uncertain views about secondary findings, but after discussion with the other parent opted to receive them. CONCLUSION: Health-care professionals need to be prepared to answer patients' questions about genetics to facilitate genome sequencing consent. Health-care professionals' education also needs to address how to effectively listen and elicit each patient's questions and views, and how to discuss uncertainty around the disease risks associated with secondary findings.

Increasing genomic literacy among adolescents.

PURPOSE: Adolescents increasingly need to be "genomics literate," and may engage more with video educational formats than traditional written formats. We conducted a pilot study to assess and compare the impact of two modes of education about genome sequencing (GS) on adolescents' genomic knowledge and genomic-related decisions. METHODS: Using an online survey, 43 adolescents ages 14-17 years were randomly assigned to watch a video or read a pamphlet about GS. Measures included pre- and postintervention assessment of genomic knowledge, perceived utility of these materials for decisions about participating in genetic research, interest in receiving GS results, and overall satisfaction with these materials. Analyses described results for all participants and compared results between intervention groups. RESULTS: Self-reported genomic knowledge increased overall (p < 0.001). Postintervention knowledge about GS limitations was higher among video group than pamphlet group participants (p = 0.038). More video group than pamphlet group participants expressed satisfaction with the material's understandability (45% vs. 29%) and suitability (91% vs. 76%). Interest in receiving personal GS results was significantly associated with being female (p = 0.01) and younger (14-15 years vs. 16-17 years) (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: A video format may be preferable for increasing genomic literacy among adolescents. Further research with adolescents is needed to better understand how gender and age may impact genomic decisions and preferences.

Development of a measure of genome sequencing knowledge for young people: The kids-KOGS.

Genome sequencing (GS) is increasingly being used to diagnose rare diseases in paediatric patients; however, no measures exist to evaluate their knowledge of this technology. We aimed to develop a robust measure of knowledge of GS (the kids-KOGS') suitable for use in the paediatric setting as well as for general public education. The target age was 11 to 15 year olds. An iterative process involving six sequential stages was conducted to develop a set of draft true/false items. These were then administered to 539 target-age school pupils (mean 12.8; SD ± 1.3), from the United Kingdom. Item-response theory was used to confirm the psychometric suitability of the candidate items. None of the Items was identified as misfits. All 10 items performed well under the two-parameter logistic model. The internal consistency of the test was 0.84 (Cronbach alpha value) indicating excellent reliability. The mean kids-KOGS score in the sample overall was 4.24 (SD; 2.49), where 0 = low knowledge and 10 = high knowledge. Age was positively associated with score in a multivariate linear regression. The kids-KOGS is a short and reliable tool that can be used by researchers and healthcare professionals offering GS to paediatric patients. Further validation in a clinical setting is required.

Cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial comparing DVD-assisted and traditional genetic counselling in systematic population testing for BRCA1/2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: Newer approaches to genetic counselling are required for population-based testing. We compare traditional face-to-face genetic counselling with a DVD-assisted approach for population-based BRCA1/2 testing. METHODS: A cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial in the London Ashkenazi Jewish population. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Ashkenazi Jewish men/women >18 years; exclusion criteria: (a) known BRCA1/2 mutation, (b) previous BRCA1/2 testing and (c) first-degree relative of BRCA1/2 carrier. Ashkenazi Jewish men/women underwent pre-test genetic counselling prior to BRCA1/2 testing in the Genetic Cancer Prediction through Population Screening trial (ISRCTN73338115). Genetic counselling clinics (clusters) were randomised to traditional counselling (TC) and DVD-based counselling (DVD-C) approaches. DVD-C involved a DVD presentation followed by shorter face-to-face genetic counselling. Outcome measures included genetic testing uptake, cancer risk perception, increase in knowledge, counselling time and satisfaction (Genetic Counselling Satisfaction Scale). Random-effects models adjusted for covariates compared outcomes between TC and DVD-C groups. One-sided 97.5% CI was used to determine non-inferiority. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: relevance, satisfaction, adequacy, emotional impact and improved understanding with the DVD; cost-minimisation analysis for TC and DVD-C approaches. RESULTS: 936 individuals (clusters=256, mean-size=3.6) were randomised to TC (n=527, clusters=134) and DVD-C (n=409, clusters=122) approaches. Groups were similar at baseline, mean age=53.9 (SD=15) years, women=66.8%, men=33.2%. DVD-C was non-inferior to TC for increase in knowledge (d=-0.07; lower 97.5% CI=-0.41), counselling satisfaction (d=-0.38, 97.5% CI=1.2) and risk perception (d=0.08; upper 97.5% CI=3.1). Group differences and CIs did not cross non-inferiority margins. DVD-C was equivalent to TC for uptake of genetic testing (d=-3%; lower/upper 97.5% CI -7.9%/1.7%) and superior for counselling time (20.4 (CI 18.7 to 22.2) min reduction (p<0.005)). 98% people found the DVD length and information satisfactory. 85-89% felt it improved their understanding of risks/benefits/implications/purpose of genetic testing. 95% would recommend it to others. The cost of genetic counselling for DVD-C=£7787 and TC=£17 307. DVD-C resulted in cost savings=£9520 (£14/volunteer). CONCLUSIONS: DVD-C is an effective, acceptable, non-inferior, time-saving and cost-efficient alternative to TC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN 73338115.

Health care professionals' attitudes towards population-based genetic testing and risk-stratification for ovarian cancer: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Ovarian cancer is usually diagnosed at a late stage when outcomes are poor. Personalised ovarian cancer risk prediction, based on genetic and epidemiological information and risk stratified management in adult women could improve outcomes. Examining health care professionals' (HCP) attitudes to ovarian cancer risk stratified management, willingness to support women, self-efficacy (belief in one's own ability to successfully complete a task), and knowledge about ovarian cancer will help identify training needs in anticipation of personalised ovarian cancer risk prediction being introduced. METHODS: An anonymous survey was distributed online to HCPs via relevant professional organisations in the UK. Kruskal-Wallis tests and pairwise comparisons were used to compare knowledge and self-efficacy scores between different types of HCPs, and attitudes toward population-based genetic testing and risk stratified management were described. Content analysis was undertaken of free text responses concerning HCPs willingness to discuss risk management options with women. RESULTS: One hundred forty-six eligible HCPs completed the survey: oncologists (31%); genetics clinicians (30%); general practitioners (22%); gynaecologists (10%); nurses (4%); and 'others'. Scores for knowledge of ovarian cancer and genetics, and self-efficacy in conducting a cancer risk consultation were generally high but significantly lower for general practitioners compared to genetics clinicians, oncologists, and gynaecologists. Support for population-based genetic testing was not high (<50%). Attitudes towards ovarian cancer risk stratification were mixed, although the majority of participants indicated a willingness to discuss management options with patients. CONCLUSIONS: Larger samples are required to investigate attitudes to population-based genetic testing for ovarian cancer risk and to establish why some HCPs are hesitant to offer testing to all adult female patients. If ovarian cancer risk assessment using genetic testing and non-genetic information including epidemiological information is rolled out on a population basis, training will be needed for HCPs in primary care to enable them to provide appropriate support to women at each stage of the process.

Awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic testing for cancer risk among ethnic minority groups: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing for risk of hereditary cancer can help patients to make important decisions about prevention or early detection. US and UK studies show that people from ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive genetic testing. It is important to understand various groups' awareness of genetic testing and its acceptability to avoid further disparities in health care. This review aims to identify and detail awareness, knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes towards genetic counselling/testing for cancer risk prediction in ethnic minority groups. METHODS: A search was carried out in PsycInfo, CINAHL, Embase and MEDLINE. Search terms referred to ethnicity, genetic testing/counselling, cancer, awareness, knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions. Quantitative and qualitative studies, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2015, were included. RESULTS: Forty-one studies were selected for review: 39 from the US, and two from Australia. Results revealed low awareness and knowledge of genetic counselling/testing for cancer susceptibility amongst ethnic minority groups including African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanics. Attitudes towards genetic testing were generally positive; perceived benefits included positive implications for personal health and being able to inform family. However, negative attitudes were also evident, particularly the anticipated emotional impact of test results, and concerns about confidentiality, stigma, and discrimination. Chinese Australian groups were less studied, but of interest was a finding from qualitative research indicating that different views of who close family members are could impact on reported family history of cancer, which could in turn impact a risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Interventions are needed to increase awareness and knowledge of genetic testing for cancer risk and to reduce the perceived stigma and taboo surrounding the topic of cancer in ethnic minority groups. More detailed research is needed in countries other than the US and across a broader spectrum of ethnic minority groups to develop effective culturally sensitive approaches for cancer prevention.

Impact of a decision aid about stratified ovarian cancer risk-management on women's knowledge and intentions: a randomised online experimental survey study.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification using genetic and other types of personal information could improve current best available approaches to ovarian cancer risk reduction, improving identification of women at increased risk of ovarian cancer and reducing unnecessary interventions for women at lower risk. Amounts of information given to women may influence key informed decision-related outcomes, e.g. knowledge. The primary aim of this study was to compare informed decision-related outcomes between women given one of two versions (gist vs. extended) of a decision aid about stratified ovarian cancer risk-management. METHODS: This was an experimental survey study comparing the effects of brief (gist) information with lengthier, more detailed (extended) information on cognitions relevant to informed decision-making about participating in risk-stratified ovarian cancer screening. Women with no personal history of ovarian cancer were recruited through an online survey company and randomised to view the gist (n = 512) or extended (n = 519) version of a website-based decision aid and completed an online survey. Primary outcomes were knowledge and intentions. Secondary outcomes included attitudes (values) and decisional conflict. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the gist and extended conditions in knowledge about ovarian cancer (time*group interaction: F = 0.20, p = 0.66) or intention to participate in ovarian cancer screening based on genetic risk assessment (t(1029) = 0.43, p = 0.67). There were also no between-groups differences in secondary outcomes. In the sample overall (n = 1031), knowledge about ovarian cancer increased from before to after exposure to the decision aid (from 5.71 to 6.77 out of a possible 10: t = 19.04, p < 0.001), and 74% of participants said that they would participate in ovarian cancer screening based on genetic risk assessment. CONCLUSIONS: No differences in knowledge or intentions were found between women who viewed the gist version and women who viewed the extended version of a decision aid about risk-stratified ovarian cancer screening. Knowledge increased for women in both decision aid groups. Further research is needed to determine the ideal volume and type of content for decision aids about stratified ovarian cancer risk-management. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: This study was registered with the ISRCTN registry; registration number: ISRCTN48627877 .

Genome sequencing for healthy individuals.

Genome sequencing of healthy individuals has the potential to lead to improved well-being and disease prevention, but numerous challenges remain that must be addressed to realize these benefits and, importantly, these benefits must be equitable across society.

Development and preliminary evaluation of an online educational video about whole-genome sequencing for research participants, patients, and the general public.

BACKGROUND: As whole-genome sequencing (WGS) increases in availability, WGS educational aids are needed for research participants, patients, and the general public. Our aim was therefore to develop an accessible and scalable WGS educational aid. METHODS: We engaged multiple stakeholders in an iterative process over a 1-year period culminating in the production of a novel 10-minute WGS educational animated video, "Whole Genome Sequencing and You" (https://goo.gl/HV8ezJ). We then presented the animated video to 281 online-survey respondents (the video-information group). There were also two comparison groups: a written-information group (n = 281) and a no-information group (n = 300). RESULTS: In the video-information group, 79% reported the video was easy to understand, satisfaction scores were high (mean 4.00 on 1-5 scale, where 5 = high satisfaction), and knowledge increased significantly. There were significant differences in knowledge compared with the no-information group but few differences compared with the written-information group. Intention to receive personal results from WGS and decisional conflict in response to a hypothetical scenario did not differ between the three groups. CONCLUSIONS: The educational animated video, "Whole Genome Sequencing and You," was well received by this sample of online-survey respondents. Further work is needed to evaluate its utility as an aid to informed decision making about WGS in other populations.Genet Med 18 5, 501-512.

A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on broad consent and data sharing in the United States.

PURPOSE: In 2011, an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposed that de-identified human data and specimens be included in biobanks only if patients provide consent. The National Institutes of Health Genomic Data Sharing policy went into effect in 2015, requiring broad consent from almost all research participants. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review of attitudes toward biobanking, broad consent, and data sharing. Bibliographic databases included MEDLINE, Web of Science, EthxWeb, and GenETHX. Study screening was conducted using DistillerSR. RESULTS: The final 48 studies included surveys (n = 23), focus groups (n = 8), mixed methods (n = 14), interviews (n = 1), and consent form analyses (n = 2). Study quality was characterized as good (n = 19), fair (n = 27), and poor (n = 2). Although many participants objected, broad consent was often preferred over tiered or study-specific consent, particularly when broad consent was the only option, samples were de-identified, logistics of biobanks were communicated, and privacy was addressed. Willingness for data to be shared was high, but it was lower among individuals from under-represented minorities, individuals with privacy and confidentiality concerns, and when pharmaceutical companies had access to data. CONCLUSIONS: Additional research is needed to understand factors affecting willingness to give broad consent for biobank research and data sharing in order to address concerns to enhance acceptability.Genet Med 18 7, 663-671.

Experiences and concerns of patients with recurrent attacks of acute hepatic porphyria: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The acute hepatic porphyrias (AHPs) are rare inborn errors of heme biosynthesis, characterized clinically by life-threatening acute neurovisceral attacks. Patients with recurrent attacks have a decreased quality of life (QoL); however, no interactive assessment of these patients' views has been reported. We conducted guided discussions regarding specific topics, to explore patients' disease experience and its impact on their lives. METHODS: Sixteen AHP patients experiencing acute attacks were recruited to moderator-led online focus groups. Five groups (3-4 patients each) were conducted and thematic analyses to identify, examine, and categorize patterns in the data was performed. RESULTS: All patients identified prodromal symptoms that began days prior to acute severe pain; the most common included confusion ("brain fog"), irritability, and fatigue. Patients avoided hospitalization due to prior poor experiences with physician knowledge of AHPs or their treatment. All patients used complementary and alternative medicine treatments to avoid hospitalization or manage chronic pain and 81% reported varying degrees of effectiveness. All patients indicated their disease impacted personal relationships due to feelings of isolation and difficulty adjusting to the disease's limitations. CONCLUSION: Patients with recurrent attacks recognize prodromal warning symptoms, attempt to avoid hospitalization, turn to alternative treatments, and have markedly impaired QoL. Counseling and individualized support is crucial for AHP patients with recurrent attacks.

Conducting a large, multi-site survey about patients' views on broad consent: challenges and solutions.

BACKGROUND: As biobanks play an increasing role in the genomic research that will lead to precision medicine, input from diverse and large populations of patients in a variety of health care settings will be important in order to successfully carry out such studies. One important topic is participants' views towards consent and data sharing, especially since the 2011 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM), and subsequently the 2015 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) were issued by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). These notices required that participants consent to research uses of their de-identified tissue samples and most clinical data, and allowing such consent be obtained in a one-time, open-ended or "broad" fashion. Conducting a survey across multiple sites provides clear advantages to either a single site survey or using a large online database, and is a potentially powerful way of understanding the views of diverse populations on this topic. METHODS: A workgroup of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network, a national consortium of 9 sites (13 separate institutions, 11 clinical centers) supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) that combines DNA biorepositories with electronic medical record (EMR) systems for large-scale genetic research, conducted a survey to understand patients' views on consent, sample and data sharing for future research, biobank governance, data protection, and return of research results. RESULTS: Working across 9 sites to design and conduct a national survey presented challenges in organization, meeting human subjects guidelines at each institution, and survey development and implementation. The challenges were met through a committee structure to address each aspect of the project with representatives from all sites. Each committee's output was integrated into the overall survey plan. A number of site-specific issues were successfully managed allowing the survey to be developed and implemented uniformly across 11 clinical centers. CONCLUSIONS: Conducting a survey across a number of institutions with different cultures and practices is a methodological and logistical challenge. With a clear infrastructure, collaborative attitudes, excellent lines of communication, and the right expertise, this can be accomplished successfully.

Impact of Genomic Counseling on Informed Decision-Making among ostensibly Healthy Individuals Seeking Personal Genome Sequencing: the HealthSeq Project.

Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of 'genomic counseling' on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants' informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants' satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = -4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.

How do students react to analyzing their own genomes in a whole-genome sequencing course?: outcomes of a longitudinal cohort study.

PURPOSE: Health-care professionals need to be trained to work with whole-genome sequencing (WGS) in their practice. Our aim was to explore how students responded to a novel genome analysis course that included the option to analyze their own genomes. METHODS: This was an observational cohort study. Questionnaires were administered before (T3) and after the genome analysis course (T4), as well as 6 months later (T5). In-depth interviews were conducted at T5. RESULTS: All students (n = 19) opted to analyze their own genomes. At T5, 12 of 15 students stated that analyzing their own genomes had been useful. Ten reported they had applied their knowledge in the workplace. Technical WGS knowledge increased (mean of 63.8% at T3, mean of 72.5% at T4; P = 0.005). In-depth interviews suggested that analyzing their own genomes may increase students' motivation to learn and their understanding of the patient experience. Most (but not all) of the students reported low levels of WGS results-related distress and low levels of regret about their decision to analyze their own genomes. CONCLUSION: Giving students the option of analyzing their own genomes may increase motivation to learn, but some students may experience personal WGS results-related distress and regret. Additional evidence is required before considering incorporating optional personal genome analysis into medical education on a large scale.

Contemplating genetic feedback regarding lung cancer susceptibility.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We examined three theoretical models (self-enhancement theory, consistency theory, and a combined model) for understanding how expectations and test result favorability influence smokers' desire for a retest following hypothetical genetic test results. METHOD: College smokers (N = 128) read a brochure describing a biomarker for lung cancer (the GSTM1 gene) then reported whether they thought they had the gene (indicating lower lung cancer risk) or were missing the gene (indicating higher lung cancer risk). Participants then reported whether they would get retested if they received favorable GSTM1 results versus unfavorable GSTM1 results. RESULTS: Participants were most likely to want a retest, suggesting rejection of the results, if they expected favorable news yet received unfavorable news. CONCLUSION: The findings supported the combined model such that smokers expressed greatest interest in a retest when they imagined genetic risk feedback that challenges both enhancement and consistency motives.