scholarly journals Public preferences for communicating personal genomic risk information: a focus group study

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (6) ◽  
pp. 1203-1214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia K. Smit ◽  
Louise A. Keogh ◽  
Jolyn Hersch ◽  
Ainsley J. Newson ◽  
Phyllis Butow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Risk Information ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Personal Genomic ◽  
Genomic Risk

scholarly journals Exploring the Potential Emotional and Behavioural Impact of Providing Personalised Genomic Risk Information to the Public: A Focus Group Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 309-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia K. Smit ◽  
Louise A. Keogh ◽  
Ainsley J. Newson ◽  
Jolyn Hersch ◽  
Phyllis Butow ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Risk Information ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
The Public ◽  
Genomic Risk

scholarly journals A Focus Group Study of Perceptions of Genetic Risk Disclosure in Members of the Public in Sweden: “I’ll Phone the Five Closest Ones, but What Happens to the Other Ten?”

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1191
Author(s):  
Carolina Hawranek ◽  
Senada Hajdarevic ◽  
Anna Rosén
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Genetic Risk ◽  
Qualitative Content Analysis ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
Risk Information ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Clinical Genetics ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Risk Disclosure ◽  
Focus Group Study

This study explores perceptions and preferences on receiving genetic risk information about hereditary cancer risk in members of the Swedish public. We conducted qualitative content analysis of five focus group discussions with participants (n = 18) aged between 24 and 71 years, recruited from various social contexts. Two prominent phenomena surfaced around the interplay between the three stakeholders involved in risk disclosure: the individual, healthcare, and the relative at risk. First, there is a genuine will to share risk information that can benefit others, even if this is difficult and causes discomfort. Second, when the duty to inform becomes overwhelming, compromises are made, such as limiting one’s own responsibility of disclosure or projecting the main responsibility onto another party. In conclusion, our results reveal a discrepancy between public expectations and the actual services offered by clinical genetics. These expectations paired with desire for a more personalized process and shared decision-making highlight a missing link in today’s risk communication and suggest a need for developed clinical routines with stronger healthcare–patient collaboration. Future research needs to investigate the views of genetic professionals on how to address these expectations to co-create a transparent risk disclosure process which can realize the full potential of personalized prevention.

Risk information ? barrier to informed choice? A focus group study

2004 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 375-380 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anke Steckelberg ◽  
J�rgen Kasper ◽  
Michael Redegeld ◽  
Ingrid M�hlhauser
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Informed Choice ◽  
Risk Information ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Information Barrier

scholarly journals Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 451-457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juli Murphy Bollinger ◽  
Joan Scott ◽  
Rachel Dvoskin ◽  
David Kaufman
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Genetic Research ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
Research Results

Policy, Ignorance, and the Will of the People

2021 ◽  
pp. 180-206
Author(s):  
Kristoffer Ahlstrom-Vij ◽  
Jennifer R. Steele
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Focus Group ◽  
Immigration Policy ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Fiscal Impact ◽  
Public Preferences ◽  
The People ◽  
Counterfactual Models ◽  
The Will

It is well established that the general population tend to lack in-depth knowledge about key political and policy matters. What are the implications for policymaking? This chapter considers this question in the context of immigration policy, reporting first on a focus group study which offers evidence that reported desires for a reduced number of immigrants might ultimately reflect a desire for immigrants of (perceived) high quality, not a reduction in overall quantity, where quality is defined in terms of fiscal impact. The chapter then argues that public preferences for such “good immigrants” are problematic, deploying a number of counterfactual models that suggest that such preferences are based on mistaken beliefs, and arguing that they thereby likely fail to reflect what the person truly desires. These findings extend beyond immigration policy and serve to highlight the often-overlooked problem that policies implemented with reference to popular sentiments might not capture “the will of the people.”

scholarly journals Implementation considerations for offering personal genomic risk information to the public: a qualitative study

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amelia K. Smit ◽  
Gillian Reyes-Marcelino ◽  
Louise Keogh ◽  
Kate Dunlop ◽  
Ainsley J. Newson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Risk Information ◽  
Personal Genomic ◽  
The Public ◽  
Genomic Risk

Latina Adolescents' Plans, Barriers, and Supports: A Focus Group Study

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen H. McWhirter ◽  
Marina Valdez ◽  
Alisia R. Caban ◽  
Christina L. Aranda
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Group Study ◽  
Latina Adolescents
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document