Psychological Distress and Quality of Life in Participants Undergoing Genetic Testing for Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy Caused by <b><i>TMEM43</i></b> p.S358L: Is It Time to Offer Population-Based Genetic Screening?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We have identified 27 families in Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) with the founder variant TMEM43 p.S358L responsible for 1 form of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. Current screening guidelines rely solely on cascade genetic screening, which may result in unrecognized, high-risk carriers who would benefit from preemptive implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy. This pilot study explored the acceptability among subjects to TMEM43 p.S358L population-based genetic screening (PBGS) in this Canadian province. METHODS: A prospective cohort study assessed attitudes, psychological distress, and health-related quality of life (QOL) in unselected individuals who underwent genetic screening for the TMEM43 p.S358L variant. Participants (n = 73) were recruited via advertisements and completed 2 surveys at baseline, 6 months, and 1 year which measured health-related QOL (SF-36v2) and psychological distress (Impact of Events Scale). RESULTS: No variant-positive carriers were identified. Of those screened through a telephone questionnaire, >95% felt positive about population-genetic screening for TMEM43 p.S358L, though 68% reported some degree of anxiety after seeing the advertisement. There were no significant changes in health-related QOL or psychological distress scores over the study period. CONCLUSION: Despite some initial anxiety, we show support for PBGS among research subjects who screened negative for the TMEM43 p.S358L variant in NL. These findings have implications for future PBGS programs in the province.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".