Emerging Genetic Counselor Roles within the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries: as Industry Interest Grows in Rare Genetic Disorders, How are Genetic Counselors Joining the Discussion?

Traditionally, the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry (BPI) has focused drug development at the mass-market level targeting common medical issues. However, a recent trend is the development of therapies for orphan or rare disorders, including many genetic disorders. Developing treatments for genetic disorders requires an understanding of the needs of the community and translating genomic information to clinical and non-clinical audiences. The core skills of genetic counselors (GCs) include a deep knowledge of genetics and ability to communicate complex information to a broad audience, making GCs a choice fit for this shift in drug development. To date there is limited data defining the roles GCs hold within this industry. This exploratory study aimed to define the roles and motivation of GCs working in BPI, assess job satisfaction, and identify translatable skills and current gaps in GC training programs. The authors surveyed 26 GCs working in BPI in the United States; 79 % work for companies focused on rare disorders. GC positions in BPI are growing, with 57 % of respondents being the first GC in their role. GCs in BPI continue to utilize core genetic counseling competencies, though 72 % felt their training did not fully prepare them for BPI. These data suggest opportunities for exposure to BPI in GC training to better prepare future generations of GCs for these career opportunities. GC satisfaction was high in BPI, notably in areas traditionally reported as less satisfying on the National Society for Genetic Counselors Professional Status Survey: salary and advancement opportunities. BPI's growing interest in rare disorders represents a career opportunity for GCs, addressing both historic areas of dissatisfaction for GCs and BPI's genomic communication needs.

Mothers' perspectives on their child's mental illness as compared to other complex disorders in their family: insights to inform genetic counseling practice.

To facilitate the development of a therapeutic alliance in genetic counseling, it is important that the counselor understands how families might perceive the condition that constitutes the reason for the referral. Through training and professional practice, genetic counselors develop a thorough understanding of families' perceptions of the conditions that are common indications for genetic counseling. But, for referral indications that are less frequent, like serious mental illnesses, genetic counselors may feel less confident in their understanding of the family's experience, or in their ability to provide psychosocial support when serious mental illness is reported in a family history. This may impede the establishment of a therapeutic alliance. As research shows that most referrals for genetic counseling related to serious mental illness are for female first-degree family members of affected individuals, we sought to explore how this group perceives serious mental illness. To provide a frame of reference with which genetic counselors may be more familiar, we explored how women perceived serious mental illness compared to other common complex disorders in their family. We conducted semi-structured interviews with women who had a child with a serious mental illness (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, bipolar disorder) and a first-degree relative with another common complex disorder (diabetes, heart disease, cancer). Interviews were transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis. Saturation was reached when nine women had participated. Serious mental illness was perceived as being more severe and as having a greater impact on the family than diabetes, heart disease, or cancer. Themes identified included guilt, stigma, and loss. Some of the most important issues that contribute to mothers' perceptions that serious mental illness is more severe than other common complex disorders could be effectively addressed in genetic counseling. Developing a heightened awareness of how family members experience a relative's mental illness may help genetic counselors to be better able to provide psychosocial support to this group, whether serious mental illness constitutes the primary reason for referral or appears in the family history during counseling for a different referral reason.

Mid-career faculty development in academic medicine: How does it impact faculty and institutional vitality?

PURPOSE: Faculty vitality is integral to the advancement of higher education. Strengthening vitality is particularly important for mid-career faculty, who represent the largest and most dissatisfied segment. The demands of academic medicine appear to be another factor that may put faculty at risk of attrition. To address these issues, we initiated a ten-month mid-career faculty development program. METHODS: A mixed-methods quasi-experimental design was used to evaluate the program's impact on faculty and institutional vitality. Pre/post surveys compared participants with a matched reference group. Quantitative data were augmented by interviews and focus groups with multiple stakeholders. RESULTS: At the program's conclusion, participants showed statistically significant gains in knowledge, skills, attitudes, and connectivity when compared to the referents. CONCLUSION: Given that mid-career faculty development in academic medicine has not been extensively studied, our evaluation provides a useful perspective to guide future initiatives aimed at enhancing the vitality and leadership capacity of mid-career faculty.