Testing a best practices risk result format to communicate genetic risks

Kyle W. Davis; Debra L. Roter; Tara Schmidlen; Laura B. Scheinfeldt; William M.P. Klein

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021

Testing a best practices risk result format to communicate genetic risks

Kyle W. Davis, Debra L. Roter, Tara Schmidlen, Laura B. Scheinfeldt, William M.P. Klein

Bloomberg School of Public Health

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effect of a genetic report format using risk communication “best-practices” on risk perceptions, in part to reduce risk overestimates. Methods: Adults (N = 470) from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) were randomized to a 2 × 2 experimental design to receive a hypothetical “personalized” genetic risk result for leukemia (relative risk = 1.5 or 2.5) through either the standard CPMC report (N = 232) or an enriched report informed by best practices (N = 238). A one-time, online survey assessed numeracy and risk perceptions including “feelings of risk” and a numerical estimate. Results: Regardless of numeracy, participants who received the enriched report had fewer overestimates of their lifetime risk estimate (LRE; odds ratio = 0.19, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two of three measures (p < .001). Participants with higher numeracy scores had fewer overestimates of LRE (OR = 0.66, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two out of three measures (p ≤. 01); the interaction between numeracy and report format was non-significant. Conclusion: The enriched report produced more accurate LRE and lower risk perceptions regardless of numeracy level, suggesting the enriched format was helpful to individuals irrespective of numeracy ability. Practice implications: Best practice elements in risk reports may help individuals form more accurate risk perceptions.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	936-943
Number of pages	8
Journal	Patient Education and Counseling
Volume	104
Issue number	5
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021
State	Published - May 2021

Keywords

Genomic risk
Health risk assessment
Numeracy
Personalized medicine
Risk communication
Risk perception

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Medicine(all)

Access to Document

10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021

Cite this

@article{2e7d8a16b5c14f46841973a2ede14dab,

title = "Testing a best practices risk result format to communicate genetic risks",

abstract = "Objective: To investigate the effect of a genetic report format using risk communication “best-practices” on risk perceptions, in part to reduce risk overestimates. Methods: Adults (N = 470) from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) were randomized to a 2 × 2 experimental design to receive a hypothetical “personalized” genetic risk result for leukemia (relative risk = 1.5 or 2.5) through either the standard CPMC report (N = 232) or an enriched report informed by best practices (N = 238). A one-time, online survey assessed numeracy and risk perceptions including “feelings of risk” and a numerical estimate. Results: Regardless of numeracy, participants who received the enriched report had fewer overestimates of their lifetime risk estimate (LRE; odds ratio = 0.19, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two of three measures (p < .001). Participants with higher numeracy scores had fewer overestimates of LRE (OR = 0.66, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two out of three measures (p ≤. 01); the interaction between numeracy and report format was non-significant. Conclusion: The enriched report produced more accurate LRE and lower risk perceptions regardless of numeracy level, suggesting the enriched format was helpful to individuals irrespective of numeracy ability. Practice implications: Best practice elements in risk reports may help individuals form more accurate risk perceptions.",

keywords = "Genomic risk, Health risk assessment, Numeracy, Personalized medicine, Risk communication, Risk perception",

author = "Davis, {Kyle W.} and Roter, {Debra L.} and Tara Schmidlen and Scheinfeldt, {Laura B.} and Klein, {William M.P.}",

note = "Funding Information: The authors did not receive funding from the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. However, this research was supported by the Johns Hopkins University/National Institutes of Health Genetic Counseling Training Program . Funding Information: We would like to thank the Coriell Institute for Medical Research for their support, the Coriell IT team for their work implementing this study, and the CMPC participants who enrolled. We would also like to thank the Genetic Counseling Training Program at the National Human Genome Research Institute at the NIH for funding this project. This project was completed as part of a master{\textquoteright}s thesis in genetic counseling at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Genetic Counseling Training Program at the National Institutes of Health under the supervision of the last author. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 Elsevier B.V.",

year = "2021",

month = may,

doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "104",

pages = "936--943",

journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",

issn = "0738-3991",

publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testing a best practices risk result format to communicate genetic risks

AU - Davis, Kyle W.

AU - Roter, Debra L.

AU - Schmidlen, Tara

AU - Scheinfeldt, Laura B.

AU - Klein, William M.P.

N1 - Funding Information: The authors did not receive funding from the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. However, this research was supported by the Johns Hopkins University/National Institutes of Health Genetic Counseling Training Program . Funding Information: We would like to thank the Coriell Institute for Medical Research for their support, the Coriell IT team for their work implementing this study, and the CMPC participants who enrolled. We would also like to thank the Genetic Counseling Training Program at the National Human Genome Research Institute at the NIH for funding this project. This project was completed as part of a master’s thesis in genetic counseling at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the Genetic Counseling Training Program at the National Institutes of Health under the supervision of the last author. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2021/5

Y1 - 2021/5

N2 - Objective: To investigate the effect of a genetic report format using risk communication “best-practices” on risk perceptions, in part to reduce risk overestimates. Methods: Adults (N = 470) from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) were randomized to a 2 × 2 experimental design to receive a hypothetical “personalized” genetic risk result for leukemia (relative risk = 1.5 or 2.5) through either the standard CPMC report (N = 232) or an enriched report informed by best practices (N = 238). A one-time, online survey assessed numeracy and risk perceptions including “feelings of risk” and a numerical estimate. Results: Regardless of numeracy, participants who received the enriched report had fewer overestimates of their lifetime risk estimate (LRE; odds ratio = 0.19, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two of three measures (p < .001). Participants with higher numeracy scores had fewer overestimates of LRE (OR = 0.66, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two out of three measures (p ≤. 01); the interaction between numeracy and report format was non-significant. Conclusion: The enriched report produced more accurate LRE and lower risk perceptions regardless of numeracy level, suggesting the enriched format was helpful to individuals irrespective of numeracy ability. Practice implications: Best practice elements in risk reports may help individuals form more accurate risk perceptions.

AB - Objective: To investigate the effect of a genetic report format using risk communication “best-practices” on risk perceptions, in part to reduce risk overestimates. Methods: Adults (N = 470) from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) were randomized to a 2 × 2 experimental design to receive a hypothetical “personalized” genetic risk result for leukemia (relative risk = 1.5 or 2.5) through either the standard CPMC report (N = 232) or an enriched report informed by best practices (N = 238). A one-time, online survey assessed numeracy and risk perceptions including “feelings of risk” and a numerical estimate. Results: Regardless of numeracy, participants who received the enriched report had fewer overestimates of their lifetime risk estimate (LRE; odds ratio = 0.19, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two of three measures (p < .001). Participants with higher numeracy scores had fewer overestimates of LRE (OR = 0.66, p < .001) and lower feelings of risk on two out of three measures (p ≤. 01); the interaction between numeracy and report format was non-significant. Conclusion: The enriched report produced more accurate LRE and lower risk perceptions regardless of numeracy level, suggesting the enriched format was helpful to individuals irrespective of numeracy ability. Practice implications: Best practice elements in risk reports may help individuals form more accurate risk perceptions.

KW - Genomic risk

KW - Health risk assessment

KW - Numeracy

KW - Personalized medicine

KW - Risk communication

KW - Risk perception

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85094823985&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85094823985&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2020.10.021

M3 - Article

C2 - 33131927

AN - SCOPUS:85094823985

SN - 0738-3991

VL - 104

SP - 936

EP - 943

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

IS - 5

ER -

Testing a best practices risk result format to communicate genetic risks

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this