MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080752148 · doi:10.1007/s10897-012-9517-7

22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome: Attitudes towards Disclosing the Risk of Psychiatric Illness

2012· article· en· W2080752148 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicole Martin, Marina Mikhaelian, Cheryl Cytrynbaum, Cheryl Shuman, David Chitayat, Rosanna Weksberg, Anne S. Bassett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Genetic Counseling · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCongenital heart defects research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick ChildrenCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthMount Sinai Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPsychiatryMental illnessSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)MedicineGenetic counselingPsychosisPsychiatric diagnosisClinical psychologyPsychologyMental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

22q11.2 Deletion Syndrome (22q11.2DS) is a common microdeletion syndrome with multisystem features. There is a strong association with psychiatric disorders. One in every four to five patients develop schizophrenia. Despite studies showing that early diagnosis and treatment are likely to lead to improved outcome, genetic counselors may be reluctant to discuss the risk of psychiatric illness. The aim of this research was to explore parental attitudes and genetic counselors' perspectives and practice regarding disclosure of the clinical manifestations of 22q11.2DS, particularly the risk of psychiatric illness. We delivered a questionnaire to genetic counselors via established list-serves, 54 of which were completed. We also conducted interviews with four parents of adults with 22q11.2DS and schizophrenia. The majority of counselors and parents felt that the increased risk to develop a psychiatric illness is important to disclose. However, in the initial counseling session when the diagnosis was made in infancy genetic counselors were significantly less likely to discuss the risk of psychiatric disorders compared to other later onset features such as hypothyroidism (41 % vs. 83 %, p = 0.001). When the diagnosis of 22q11.2DS was made in infancy, counselors' responses in regard to timing of disclosure about psychiatric illnesses were fairly evenly divided between infancy, childhood and adolescence. In contrast, for other major features of 22q11.2DS, disclosure would predominantly be in infancy. The respondents reported that the discussion of psychiatric issues with parents was challenging due to the stigma associated with mental illness. Some also noted limited knowledge about psychiatric illness and treatment. These results suggest that genetic counselors could benefit from further education regarding psychiatric illness in 22q11.2DS and best strategies for discussing this important subject with parents and patients.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Genetic CounselingSame topicCongenital heart defects researchFrench-language works237,207