4.2 Article

Attitudes Toward Genetic Testing in a German Population

期刊

GENETIC TESTING AND MOLECULAR BIOMARKERS
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 743-750

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT INC
DOI: 10.1089/gtmb.2008.0154

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: Population-representative or population-based studies on attitudes toward molecular genetic testing have so far been conducted in the United States, Great Britain, the Netherlands, and Finland. In 2001 our group conducted a representative survey for a German population among a total of 2076 respondents aged 14-95 years. The questionnaire administered consisted of 13 items covering the advantages and disadvantages of molecular genetic testing for hereditary diseases. We conducted a factor analysis to explore potential sub-dimensions of attitudes, and describe here the influence of sociodemographic variables on these sub-dimensions and how the attitudes of the Germans compare to those of the Finns. Results: Our factor analysis of the results showed three dimensions: approval, disapproval, and concern regarding genetic testing. In the German sample we found an overall positive attitude toward genetic testing. There was no influence of sex, but there were marked differences regarding age, educational backgrounds, and religious affiliation. Finns are more in favor of genetic testing and disapprove less than Germans. We can summarize that Germans have a markedly more skeptical view than Finns. In our opinion this could well be understood in the context of German history. We assume that this created a less conducive environment for the population to form a clearer attitude toward genetic testing as compared to the Finns. Conclusions: In the light of our results there is certainly a need for more information and education. Further, it would in our opinion be most useful if the German development regarding attitudes to genetic testing, especially after reunification, is studied longitudinally to provide a better understanding of possible developments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据