Perceptions of Genetic Testing: A Mixed-Methods Study of Patients with Pulmonary Fibrosis and Their First-Degree Relatives
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Rationale Genetic testing is an emerging tool in interstitial lung disease (ILD) as several ILD subtypes have potential genetic causes or predispositions with resultant clinical implications. There is a need to understand the perceptions of patients and their first-degree relatives of genetic testing for ILD. Objectives The objective of this study was to investigate patients with ILD and their first-degree family members’ understanding of the genetic risks associated with ILD and their interest and/or concerns about genetic testing. Methods This mixed-methods study included patients with ILD and their first-degree relatives. Data were obtained from an online survey and three focus groups. Categorical data were reported with descriptive frequencies. Chi-square analyses were used to measure associations. Focus group discussions were transcribed, coded, and analyzed according to the grounded theory principle. Results A total of 188 respondents completed the survey; 119 patients, 52 first-degree relatives, and 17 who were both patients and who also reported being a first-degree relative to someone with ILD. Most (79%) patients had idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The majority of patients and first-degree relatives were unsure if there was a genetic cause, whereas 71% of those who were both patient and first-degree relative thought there could be a genetic cause to their ILD. Fifty-nine percent of respondents worried their family members could be affected, and 72% of respondents were interested in genetic testing. Interest in genetic testing was associated with sex (P = 0.03), post-secondary education (P = 0.047), and having a family member with ILD (P = 0.02). The primary motivators were understanding risk to family members and contributing to research. First-degree relatives were concerned about insurance issues (60%) and personal stress (60%) more often than patients (40% and 28%, respectively); 29% of first-degree relatives anticipated changing their health behavior based on results. Focus group themes included disease knowledge, understanding the role of genetics in ILD, testing concerns, and how to use genetic testing information. Conclusions This study provides insight into the perceptions of patients and first-degree relatives of ILD-related genetic testing. These findings inform the need for additional patient resources, yet a better understanding of the clinical applications of ILD genetic testing and how testing may impact diagnostics, therapeutics, and prognostication.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,013 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».