Survey of Professionals of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA) towards Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing availability of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests (DTC-GTs) has great implications for public health (PH) and requires literate healthcare professionals to address the challenges they pose. We designed and conducted a survey to assess the state of knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of PH professionals members of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA) towards DTC-GTs. METHODS: EUPHA members were invited to participate and fill in the survey. We performed multivariable logistic regression to evaluate associations between selected covariates and knowledge, attitudes and behaviours of healthcare professionals towards DTC-GT. RESULTS: Three hundred and two professionals completed the survey, 66.9% of whom were not involved in genetics or genomics within their professional activities. Although 74.5% of respondents were aware that DTC-GTs could be purchased on the web, most of them reported a low level of awareness towards DTC-GTs applications and regulatory aspects. The majority did not approve the provision of DTC-GTs without consultation of a healthcare professional (91.4%), were doubtful about the test utility and validity (61%) and did not feel prepared to address citizens' questions (65.6%). Predictors of knowledge on DTC-GT were the involvement in genetics/genomics and receiving training during the studies (P < 0.0001 and P = 0.043). Predictors of attitudes were medical degree and knowledge about DTC-GTs (P = 0.006 and P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Our results revealed a high level of awareness of DTC-GT web purchasing and a moderate to low level of awareness towards their applications. Despite the overall positive attitudes, PH professionals reported a high need for strengthening regulatory aspects of DTC-GTs provision process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.040 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".