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 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 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 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

Dari Idealisme ke Pragmatisme: Pergeseran Paradigma dalam Pengembangan Hukum Ekonomi Syariah di Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-210
Author(s):  
Addiarrahman Addiarrahman ◽  
Illy Yanti
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Group Discussions ◽  
Group Discussions ◽  
Business World ◽  
Key Informants ◽  
The Public ◽  
Financial Products ◽  
Legal Consideration ◽  
Economic Law ◽  
Islamic Economic

This study seeks to understand the pragmatism of the development of sharia economic law, and its implications for Islamic financial products in Indonesia. The data comes from the results of interviews and focus group discussions with key informants from academics, practitioners, authorities, and the public. This research finds that pragmatism in the development of Islamic economic law is an approach that still dominates the DSN-MUI fatwas. The pragmatism style used is complex-eclectic pragmatism which is represented through makhārij al-fiqhiyyah, which is to choose a mild opinion by sticking to the strongest method or also called "taysīr al-manhajī". The use of this method is intended to ensure that the fatwa is truly able to answer the needs of the business world, as well as being in line with sharia principles. DSN-MUI also does not use maslahah as a legal consideration in a free or liberal way. Rather, it returns maslahah in consideration of the method, so that it is permissible to use the bay’ al-'inān contract only in a forced state (ḍarurah).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document