4.5 Article

Differences in attitudes toward genetic testing among the public, patients, and health-care professionals in Korea

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
Volume 26, Issue 10, Pages 1432-1440

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41431-018-0191-6

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National R&D Program for Cancer Control, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea [1520240]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With further advances in medical genetics, genetic tests to determine predisposition to disease are becoming viable for a growing number of diseases. Accordingly, it has also become important to identify various viewpoints on genetic testing. The aims of this study were to examine awareness of and attitudes toward genetic testing among the general public (public), cancer patients (patients), and health-care professionals (clinicians and researchers) in Korea. The present survey was conducted from November 2016 to February 2017. The public and patients were surveyed via face-to-face interviews conducted by trained interviewers. Health-care professionals were surveyed via self-administered questionnaires. In total, 1500 individuals from the general public, 1500 cancer patients, 113 clinicians, and 413 researchers were surveyed. Most respondents from the public and patients had previously heard about genetic testing (public, 89.4%; patients, 92.7%, p < 0.01). Differences in attitudes toward genetic testing among the public, patients, and professionals were noted, although most respondents in the present study were aware of genetic testing. Most of the cancer patients tended to overestimate the potential benefit of genetic testing, whereas clinicians expressed concerns for genetic testing. Providing correct information to people who are scheduled to undergo or order genetic testing could help in making an informed decision thereon.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available