...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of human genetics: EJHG >Do health professionals value genomic testing? A discrete choice experiment in inherited cardiovascular disease
【24h】

Do health professionals value genomic testing? A discrete choice experiment in inherited cardiovascular disease

机译:卫生专业人士是否重视基因组测试? 遗传心血管疾病中的离散选择实验

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Next generation sequencing (NGS) approaches are moving from research into clinical practice. However, the optimal NGS approach in well-defined adult-onset familial diseases, such as inherited cardiovascular disease, remains unclear. We aimed to determine which attributes encouraged or discouraged the uptake of genomic tests in this context, and whether this differed by test type. We conducted a web-based discrete choice experiment in health professionals in the UK who order NGS tests for inherited cardiovascular disease. Respondents completed 12 hypothetical choice tasks in which they selected a preferred test from four alternatives: whole genome sequencing, whole exome sequencing, panel testing and genetic testing not indicated. Tests were specified in terms of five attributes: diagnostic yield, detection rate for variants of unknown significance, cost, quantity of counselling received and disclosure of secondary findings. Mixed logit regression analysis was used to analyse the choice data. We found that uptake of NGS increases if tests identify more pathogenic mutations, identify fewer variants of unknown significance, or cost less. Respondents were willing to pay 117 pound for every 1% increase in diagnostic yield. Considerable heterogeneity was observed around preferences for several test attributes. Overall, panel testing had the highest predicted uptake rate. Our results indicate that NGS tests are valued by health professionals for well-defined adult-onset familial diseases, however, these professionals have strong preferences for panel testing rather than whole genome sequencing and whole exome sequencing. This finding suggests that different uptake rates should be explicitly modelled when designing and evaluating future genomic testing services.
机译:下一代测序(NGS)方法正在从研究中转变为临床实践。然而,在明确定义的成人发作家族疾病(例如遗传心血管疾病)中的最佳NGS方法仍不清楚。我们旨在确定在此上下文中鼓励或阻止基因组测试的吸收的哪些属性,以及这是否有所不同的测试类型。我们在英国的卫生专业人员中进行了一家基于网络的离散选择试验,他命令NGS测试遗传性心血管疾病。受访者完成了12个假设选择任务,其中他们选择了来自四种替代品的首选测试:全基因组测序,整个外壳测序,面板测试和遗传测试未指出。测试是根据五个属性指定的:诊断产量,变异的检测率,未知意义,成本,咨询数量的收到和披露次要结果。混合Logit回归分析用于分析选择数据。我们发现,如果测试识别出更多的致病性突变,则增加NGS的摄取会增加,确定较少的变形,或更少的成本。受访者愿意支付117磅,每1%的诊断产量增加。在几个测试属性的偏好周围观察到相当大的异质性。总体而言,面板测试具有最高的预测摄取率。我们的结果表明,NGS测试受到卫生专业人员对明确定义的成人发作的家族疾病的重视,然而,这些专业人员对面板测试具有强烈的偏好,而不是全基因组测序和整个外壳测序。该发现表明,在设计和评估未来的基因组测试服务时,应明确建模不同的摄取率。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号