Top

Published in:

01-12-2016 | Original Research

DECIDE: a Decision Support Tool to Facilitate Parents’ Choices Regarding Genome-Wide Sequencing

Authors: Patricia Birch, S. Adam, N. Bansback, R. R. Coe, J. Hicklin, A. Lehman, K. C. Li, J. M. Friedman

Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Issue 6/2016

Abstract

We describe the rationale, development, and usability testing for an integrated e-learning tool and decision aid for parents facing decisions about genome-wide sequencing (GWS) for their children with a suspected genetic condition. The online tool, DECIDE, is designed to provide decision-support and to promote high quality decisions about undergoing GWS with or without return of optional incidental finding results. DECIDE works by integrating educational material with decision aids. Users may tailor their learning by controlling both the amount of information and its format – text and diagrams and/or short videos. The decision aid guides users to weigh the importance of various relevant factors in their own lives and circumstances. After considering the pros and cons of GWS and return of incidental findings, DECIDE summarizes the user’s responses and apparent preferred choices. In a usability study of 16 parents who had already chosen GWS after conventional genetic counselling, all participants found DECIDE to be helpful. Many would have been satisfied to use it alone to guide their GWS decisions, but most would prefer to have the option of consulting a health care professional as well to aid their decision. Further testing is necessary to establish the effectiveness of using DECIDE as an adjunct to or instead of conventional pre-test genetic counselling for clinical genome-wide sequencing.

Available only for authorised users

Albada, A., Ausems, M. G. E. M., Otten, R., Bensing, J. M., & van Dulmen, S. (2011). Use and evaluation of an individually tailored website for counselees prior to breast cancer genetic counseling. Journal of Cancer Education: The Official Journal of the American Association for Cancer Education, 26(4), 670–681. doi:10.1007/s13187-011-0227-x.CrossRef

Bansback, N., Li, L. C., Lynd, L., & Bryan, S. (2014). Development and preliminary user testing of the DCIDA (Dynamic computer interactive decision application) for “nudging” patients towards high quality decisions. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 14, 62. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-14-62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Berg, J.S. (2014). Genome-scale sequencing in clinical care. JAMA, 312(18), 1865–1867. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.14665.

Berg, J. S., Khoury, M. J., & Evans, J. P. (2011). Deploying whole genome sequencing in clinical practice and public health: meeting the challenge one bin at a time. Genetics in Medicine: Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 13(6), 499–504. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e318220aaba.CrossRef

Bick, D., & Dimmock, D. (2011). Whole exome and whole genome sequencing. Current Opinion in Pediatrics, 23(6), 594–600. doi:10.1097/MOP.0b013e32834b20ec.CrossRefPubMed

Birch, P.H. (2014). Interactive e-counselling for genetics pre-test decisions: where are we now? Clinical Genetics, 1–9. doi:10.1111/cge.12430.

Blackburn, H. L., Schroeder, B., Turner, C., Shriver, C. D., Ellsworth, D. L., & Ellsworth, R. E. (2015). Management of incidental findings in the era of next-generation sequencing. Current Genomics, 16(3), 159–174. doi:10.2174/1389202916666150317232930.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bollinger, J. M., Scott, J., Dvoskin, R., & Kaufman, D. (2012). Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genetics in Medicine, 14(4), 451–457. doi:10.1038/gim.2011.66.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bombard, Y., Rozmovits, L., Trudeau, M. E., Leighl, N. B., Deal, K., & Marshall, D. A. (2014). Patients’ perceptions of gene expression profiling in breast cancer treatment decisions. Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont), 21(2), e203–e211. doi:10.3747/co.21.1524.CrossRef

Browner, C. H., Preloran, H. M., Casado, M. C., Bass, H. N., & Walker, A. P. (2003). Genetic counseling gone awry: miscommunication between prenatal genetic service providers and Mexican-origin clients. Social Science & Medicine, 56(9), 1933–1946. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00214-9.

Castellani, C., Perobelli, S., Bianchi, V., Seia, M., Melotti, P., Zanolla, L., … Lalatta, F. (2011). An interactive computer program can effectively educate potential users of cystic fibrosis carrier tests. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 155A(4), 778–785. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.33870.

Christensen, K., Dukhovny, D., Siebert, U., & Green, R. (2015). Assessing the costs and cost-effectiveness of genomic sequencing. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 5(4), 470–486. doi:10.3390/jpm5040470.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Clark, R.C., & Mayer, R.E. (2011). E-Learning and the Science of Instruction : Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia Learning (3rd Edition) (e-book.). Pfeiffer. Retrieved from http://books.google.ca/books/about/e_Learning_and_the_Science_of_Instructio.html?id=MOutGGET2VwC&pgis=1.

Columbia University Medical Center Division of Medical Genetics (Inst). (2013). Learning Genetics. Learn about exome sequencing and secondary findings. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from http://www.learninggenetics.org/.

Coulter, A., Stilwell, D., Kryworuchko, J., Mullen, P. D., Ng, C. J., & van der Weijden, T. (2013). A systematic development process for patient decision aids. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13(Suppl 2), S2. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-S2-S2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Gason, A. A., Aitken, M., Delatycki, M. B., Sheffield, E., & Metcalfe, S. A. (2004). Multimedia messages in genetics: design, development, and evaluation of a computer-based instructional resource for secondary school students in a Tay Sachs disease carrier screening program. Genetics in Medicine, 6(4), 226–231. doi:10.1097/01.GIM.0000132681.36771.63.CrossRefPubMed

Genereaux, D., van Karnebeek, C. D. M., & Birch, P. H. (2015). Costs of caring for children with an intellectual developmental disorder. Disability and Health Journal, 8(4), 646–651. doi:10.1016/j.dhjo.2015.03.011.CrossRefPubMed

Green, M. J., McInerney, A. M., Biesecker, B. B., & Fost, N. (2001). Education about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: patient preferences for a computer program or genetic counselor. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 103(1), 24–31. doi:10.1002/ajmg.1501.

Green, M. J., Peterson, S. K., Baker, M. W., Harper, G. R., Friedman, L. C., Rubinstein, W. S., & Mauger, D. T. (2004). Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA, 292(4), 442–452. doi:10.1001/jama.292.4.442.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Green, M.J., Peterson, S.K., Baker, M.W., Friedman, L.C., Harper, G.R., Rubinstein, W.S., … Mauger, D.T. (2005). Use of an educational computer program before genetic counseling for breast cancer susceptibility: effects on duration and content of counseling sessions. Genetics in Medicine, 7(4), 221–229. doi:10.1097/01.GIM.0000159905.13125.86.

Hartmann, J. E., Veach, P. M., Macfarlane, I. M., & Leroy, B. S. (2013). Genetic counselor perceptions of genetic counseling session goals: a validation study of the reciprocal-engagement model. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 24(2), 225–237. doi:10.1007/s10897-013-9647-6.

Hilgart, J., Hayward, J. A., & Iredale, R. (2012). E-genetics: exploring the acceptability and feasibility of using technology in cancer genetics services. Clinical Genetics, 81(6), 514–520. doi:10.1111/j.1399-0004.2011.01813.x.CrossRefPubMed

Joseph-Williams, N., Evans, R., Edwards, A., Newcombe, R. G., Wright, P., Grol, R., & Elwyn, G. (2010). Supporting informed decision making online in 20 minutes: an observational web-log study of a PSA test decision aid. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 12(2), e15. doi:10.2196/jmir.1307.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Kuppermann, M., Norton, M.E., Gates, E., Gregorich, S.E., Learman, L.A., Nakagawa, S., … Nease, R.F. (2009). Computerized Prenatal Genetic Testing Decision-Assisting Tool A Randomized Controlled Trial. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 113(1), 53–63. doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818e7ec4.

Lea, D. H., Kaphingst, K. A., Bowen, D., Lipkus, I., & Hadley, D. W. (2011). Communicating genetic and genomic information: health literacy and numeracy considerations. Public Health Genomics, 14(4–5), 279–289. doi:10.1159/000294191.CrossRefPubMed

Légaré, F., Kearing, S., Clay, K., Gagnon, S., D’Amours, D., Rousseau, M., & O’Connor, A. (2010). Are you SURE?: assessing patient decisional conflict with a 4-item screening test. Canadian Family Physician, 56(8), e308–e314.PubMedPubMedCentral

Lewis, M. A., Paquin, R. S., Roche, M. I., & Furberg, R. D. (2016). Supporting parental decisions about genomic sequencing for newborn screening: the NC NEXUS decision Aid. Pediatrics, 137, S16–S23. doi:10.1542/peds.2015-3731E.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Li, K.C. (2014). Supporting decision-making in whole genome/exome sequencing: parents’ perspectives. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia. Retrieved from http://circle.ubc.ca/handle/2429/50835.

Li, K. C., Birch, P. H., Garrett, B. M., MacPhee, M., Adam, S., & Friedman, J. M. (2016). Parents’ perspectives on supporting their decision making in genome-wide sequencing. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 48(3), 265–275. doi:10.1111/jnu.12207.CrossRefPubMed

Lingen, M., Albers, L., Borchers, M., Haass, S., Gärtner, J., Schröder, S., … Zirn, B. (2015). Obtaining a genetic diagnosis in a child with disability: impact on parental quality of life. Clinical Genetics, 49, 1–9. doi:10.1111/cge.12629.

Makela, N. L., Birch, P. H., Friedman, J. M., & Marra, C. A. (2009). Parental perceived value of a diagnosis for intellectual disability (ID): a qualitative comparison of families with and without a diagnosis for their child’s ID. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 149A(11), 2393–2402. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.33050.CrossRefPubMed

Meilleur, K. G., & Littleton-Kearney, M. T. (2009). Interventions to improve patient education regarding multifactorial genetic conditions: a systematic review. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 149A(4), 819–830. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32723.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Meiser, B., Irle, J., Lobb, E., & Barlow-Stewart, K. (2008). Assessment of the content and process of genetic counseling: a critical review of empirical studies. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 17(5), 434–451. doi:10.1007/s10897-008-9173-0.CrossRefPubMed

Peters, E., Hibbard, J., Slovic, P., & Dieckmann, N. (2007). Numeracy skill and the communication, comprehension, and use of risk-benefit information. Health Affairs, 26(3), 741–748. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.26.3.741.CrossRefPubMed

Rupert, D.J., Squiers, L.B., Renaud, J.M., Whitehead, N.S., Osborn, R.J., Furberg, R.D., … Tzeng, J.P. (2013). Communicating risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with an interactive decision support tool. Patient Education and Counseling, 92(2), 188–196. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.04.008

Shashi, V., McConkie-Rosell, A., Rosell, B., Schoch, K., Vellore, K., McDonald, M., … Goldstein, D.G. (2014). The utility of the traditional medical genetics diagnostic evaluation in the context of next-generation sequencing for undiagnosed genetic disorders. Genetics in Medicine, 16(2), 176–182. doi:10.1038/gim.2013.99

Sheehan, J., & Sherman, K. A. (2012). Computerised decision aids: a systematic review of their effectiveness in facilitating high-quality decision-making in various health-related contexts. Patient Education and Counseling, 88(1), 69–86. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2011.11.006.CrossRefPubMed

Shoemaker, S. J., Wolf, M. S., & Brach, C. (2014). Development of the patient education materials assessment tool (PEMAT): a new measure of understandability and actionability for print and audiovisual patient information. Patient Education and Counseling, 96(3), 395–403. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2014.05.027.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Stacey, D., Légaré, F., Col, N., Bennett, C., Barry, M., Eden, K., … Wu, J. (2014). Decision aids to help people who are facing health treatment or screening decisions. Wiley, Ltd. for The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved from http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD001431/decision-aids-to-help-people-who-are-facing-health-treatment-or-screening-decisions.

Stavropoulos, D.J., Merico, D., Jobling, R., Bowdin, S., Monfared, N., Thiruvahindrapuram, B., … Marshall, C.R. (2016). Whole-genome sequencing expands diagnostic utility and improves clinical management in paediatric medicine. Npj Genomic Medicine, 1, 15012. doi:10.1038/npjgenmed.2015.12.

Tabor, H.K., Stock, J., Brazg, T., McMillin, M.J., Dent, K.M., Yu, J.-H., … Bamshad, M.J. (2012). Informed consent for whole genome sequencing: A qualitative analysis of participant expectations and perceptions of risks, benefits, and harms. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 158A(6), 1310–1319. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.35328.

Townsend, A., Adam, S., Birch, P. H., Lohn, Z., Rousseau, F., & Friedman, J. M. (2012). “I want to know what’s in Pandora’s Box”: comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 158A(10), 2519–2525. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.35554.CrossRefPubMed

Vanstone, M., Kinsella, E. A., & Nisker, J. (2012). Information-sharing to promote informed choice in prenatal screening in the spirit of the SOGC clinical practice guideline: a proposal for an alternative model. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 34(3), 269–275. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22385671.

Viberg, J., Segerdahl, P., Langenskiöld, S., & Hansson, M. . (2015). Freedom of choice about incidental findings can frustrate participants’ true preferences. Bioethics, 30(3), 203–209. doi:10.1111/bioe.12160.

Williams, J. L., Faucett, W. A., Smith-Packard, B., Wagner, M., & Williams, M. S. (2014). An assessment of time involved in pre-test case review and counseling for a whole genome sequencing clinical research program. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 23(4), 516–521. doi:10.1007/s10897-014-9697-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Wynn, J. (2015). Genomic testing: a genetic counselor’s personal reflection on three years of consenting and testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling. doi:10.1007/s10897-015-9868-y.PubMedCentral

Yee, L. M., Wolf, M., Mullen, R., Bergeron, A. R., Bailey, S. C., Levine, R., & Grobman, W. a. (2014). A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid. Prenatal Diagnosis, 34(6), 552-557. doi:10.1002/pd.4347.

Yu, J.-H., Jamal, S. M., Tabor, H. K., & Bamshad, M. J. (2013). Self-guided management of exome and whole-genome sequencing results: changing the results return model. Genetics in Medicine, 15(9), 684–690. doi:10.1038/gim.2013.35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Yurkiewicz, I. R., Korf, B. R., & Lehmann, L. S. (2014). Prenatal whole-genome sequencing--is the quest to know a fetus’s future ethical? The New England Journal of Medicine, 370(3), 195–197. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1215536.CrossRefPubMed

Zawati, M.H., Parry, D., & Knoppers, B.M. (2014). The best interests of the child and the return of results in genetic research : international comparative perspectives. BMC Medical Ethics, 15, 72. doi:10.1186/1472-6939-15-72.

Title: DECIDE: a Decision Support Tool to Facilitate Parents’ Choices Regarding Genome-Wide Sequencing
Authors: Patricia Birch
S. Adam
N. Bansback
R. R. Coe
J. Hicklin
A. Lehman
K. C. Li
J. M. Friedman
Publication date: 01-12-2016
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Issue 6/2016
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-016-9971-8

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

DECIDE: a Decision Support Tool to Facilitate Parents’ Choices Regarding Genome-Wide Sequencing

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 6/2016

Understanding the Psychosocial Effects of WES Test Results on Parents of Children with Rare Diseases

Attitudes Toward Autism Spectrum Disorders Among Students of Allied Health Professions

Erratum to: Using ApoE Genotyping to Promote Healthy Lifestyles in Finland – Psychological Impacts: Randomized Controlled Trial

Erratum to: Genetic Counselling for Psychiatric Disorders: Accounts of Psychiatric Health Professionals in the United Kingdom

Family Studies for Classification of Variants of Uncertain Classification: Current Laboratory Clinical Practice and a New Web-Based Educational Tool

The Psychological Impact of Prenatal Diagnosis and Disclosure of Susceptibility Loci: First Impressions of Parents’ Experiences