This paper is in the following e-collection/theme issue:

Electronic/Mobile Data Capture, Internet-based Survey & Research Methodology (788) Consumer & Patient Education and Shared-Decision Making (638) Participatory Medicine & E-Patients (758)

Published on in Vol 12, No 3 (2010): Jul-Sep

Consumers’ Use of Web-Based Information and Their Decisions About Multiplex Genetic Susceptibility Testing

Consumers’ Use of Web-Based Information and Their Decisions About Multiplex Genetic Susceptibility Testing

Consumers’ Use of Web-Based Information and Their Decisions About Multiplex Genetic Susceptibility Testing

Authors of this article:

Kimberly A Kaphingst1, 2 ;   Colleen M McBride3 ;   Christopher Wade3 ;   Sharon Hensley Alford4 ;   Lawrence C Brody5 ;   Andreas D Baxevanis5
Article Authors Cited by (49) Tweetations (1) Metrics

Journals

  1. Hurle B, Citrin T, Jenkins J, Kaphingst K, Lamb N, Roseman J, Bonham V. What does it mean to be genomically literate?: National Human Genome Research Institute Meeting Report. Genetics in Medicine 2013;15(8):658 View
  2. Nasykhova Y, Barbitoff Y, Serebryakova E, Katserov D, Glotov A. Recent advances and perspectives in next generation sequencing application to the genetic research of type 2 diabetes. World Journal of Diabetes 2019;10(7):376 View
  3. Seo J, Ivanovich J, Goodman M, Biesecker B, Kaphingst K. Information Topics of Greatest Interest for Return of Genome Sequencing Results among Women Diagnosed with Breast Cancer at a Young Age. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2017;26(3):511 View
  4. Madeo A, Tercyak K, Tarini B, McBride C. Effects of Undergoing Multiplex Genetic Susceptibility Testing on Parent Attitudes towards Testing Their Children. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2014;47(3):388 View
  5. Wasson K, Hogan N, Sanders T, Helzlsouer K. Primary Care Patients’ Views, Attitudes, and Decision-Making Factors Regarding Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genome Testing: Results From a Qualitative Study. AJOB Primary Research 2012;3(2):24 View
  6. Rosenfeld L, Shepherd A, Agunwamba A, McCray A. Iterative Evaluation of a Web-Based Health Information Resource. Journal of Health Communication 2013;18(8):974 View
  7. Hawkins A, Ho A. Genetic Counseling and the Ethical Issues Around Direct to Consumer Genetic Testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2012;21(3):367 View
  8. Kaphingst K, McBride C, Wade C, Alford S, Reid R, Larson E, Baxevanis A, Brody L. Patients’ understanding of and responses to multiplex genetic susceptibility test results. Genetics in Medicine 2012;14(7):681 View
  9. Kim E, Gellis Z, Bradway C, Kenaley B. Key Determinants to using Telehealth Technology to Serve Medically Ill and Depressed Homebound Older Adults. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 2019;62(4):451 View
  10. Wade C, Shiloh S, Woolford S, Roberts J, Alford S, Marteau T, Biesecker B. Modelling decisions to undergo genetic testing for susceptibility to common health conditions: An ancillary study of the Multiplex Initiative. Psychology & Health 2012;27(4):430 View
  11. Ye X, Ng I, Seid-Karbasi P, Imam T, Lee C, Chen S, Herman A, Sharma B, Johal G, Gu B, Wasserman W. Portal for Families Overcoming Neurodevelopmental Disorders (PFOND): Implementation of a Software Framework for Facilitated Community Website Creation by Nontechnical Volunteers. JMIR Research Protocols 2013;2(2):e25 View
  12. Esmaeilzadeh P. An Empirical Evaluation of Factors Influencing Patients’ Reactions to the Implementation of Health Information Exchanges (HIEs). International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2019;35(13):1135 View
  13. Bloss C, Darst B, Topol E, Schork N. Direct-to-consumer personalized genomic testing. Human Molecular Genetics 2011;20(R2):R132 View
  14. Syurina E, Brankovic I, Probst-Hensch N, Brand A. Genome-Based Health Literacy: A New Challenge for Public Health Genomics. Public Health Genomics 2011;14(4-5):201 View
  15. Carere D, Kraft P, Kaphingst K, Roberts J, Green R. Consumers report lower confidence in their genetics knowledge following direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing. Genetics in Medicine 2016;18(1):65 View
  16. Ray L, Bujarski S, Grodin E, Hartwell E, Green R, Venegas A, Lim A, Gillis A, Miotto K. State-of-the-art behavioral and pharmacological treatments for alcohol use disorder. The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 2019;45(2):124 View
  17. Wade C, Shiloh S, Roberts J, Hensley Alford S, Marteau T, Biesecker B. Preferences among Diseases on a Genetic Susceptibility Test for Common Health Conditions: An Ancillary Study of the Multiplex Initiative. Public Health Genomics 2012;15(6):322 View
  18. Hay J, Berwick M, Zielaskowski K, White K, Rodríguez V, Robers E, Guest D, Sussman A, Talamantes Y, Schwartz M, Greb J, Bigney J, Kaphingst K, Hunley K, Buller D. Implementing an Internet-Delivered Skin Cancer Genetic Testing Intervention to Improve Sun Protection Behavior in a Diverse Population: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Research Protocols 2017;6(4):e52 View
  19. Hesse B, Suls J. Informatics-Enabled Behavioral Medicine in Oncology. The Cancer Journal 2011;17(4):222 View
  20. Birch P. Interactive e‐counselling for genetics pre‐test decisions: where are we now?. Clinical Genetics 2015;87(3):209 View
  21. Goldsmith L, Jackson L, O'Connor A, Skirton H. Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives. European Journal of Human Genetics 2012;20(8):811 View
  22. Laedtke A, O'Neill S, Rubinstein W, Vogel K. Family Physicians’ Awareness and Knowledge of the Genetic Information Non‐Discrimination Act (GINA). Journal of Genetic Counseling 2012;21(2):345 View
  23. Celik R, Toruner E. The Effect of Technology-Based Programmes on Changing Health Behaviours of Adolescents: Systematic Review. Comprehensive Child and Adolescent Nursing 2020;43(2):92 View
  24. Bernhardt B, Roche M, Perry D, Scollon S, Tomlinson A, Skinner D. Experiences with obtaining informed consent for genomic sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 2015;167(11):2635 View
  25. Kinney A, Howell R, Ruckman R, McDougall J, Boyce T, Vicuña B, Lee J, Guest D, Rycroft R, Valverde P, Gallegos K, Meisner A, Wiggins C, Stroup A, Paddock L, Walters S. Promoting guideline-based cancer genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in ethnically and geographically diverse cancer survivors: Rationale and design of a 3-arm randomized controlled trial. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2018;73:123 View
  26. Esmaeilzadeh P. Consumers’ Perceptions of Using Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) for Research Purposes. Information Systems Management 2019;36(1):57 View
  27. Hall T, Renz A, Snapinn K, Bowen D, Edwards K. Awareness and Uptake of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Among Cancer Cases, Their Relatives, and Controls: The Northwest Cancer Genetics Network. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers 2012;16(7):744 View
  28. Wessel J, Gupta J, de Groot M, Meyre D. Factors Motivating Individuals to Consider Genetic Testing for Type 2 Diabetes Risk Prediction. PLOS ONE 2016;11(1):e0147071 View
  29. Bunnik E, Janssens A, Schermer M. A tiered-layered-staged model for informed consent in personal genome testing. European Journal of Human Genetics 2013;21(6):596 View
  30. Ahmad N, Abdulkarim H. The Impact of Flow Experience and Personality Type on the Intention to Use Virtual World. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 2019;35(12):1074 View
  31. Tarini B, Tercyak K, Wilfond B. Commentary: Children and Predictive Genomic Testing: Disease Prevention, Research Protection, and Our Future. Journal of Pediatric Psychology 2011;36(10):1113 View
  32. Nelson S, Crouch J, Bamshad M, Tabor H, Yu J. Use of metaphors about exome and whole genome sequencing. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 2016;170(5):1127 View
  33. Zimmermann B, Fanderl J, Koné I, Rabaglio M, Bürki N, Shaw D, Elger B. Examining information-seeking behavior in genetic testing for cancer predisposition: A qualitative interview study. Patient Education and Counseling 2021;104(2):257 View
  34. Hughes Halbert C, Welch B, Lynch C, Magwood G, Rice L, Jefferson M, Riley J. Social determinants of family health history collection. Journal of Community Genetics 2016;7(1):57 View
  35. Covolo L, Rubinelli S, Ceretti E, Gelatti U. Internet-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: A Systematic Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2015;17(12):e279 View
  36. Jiang S. How Does Online Patient–Provider Communication Heal? Examining the Role of Patient Satisfaction and Communication Experience in China. Health Communication 2019;34(13):1637 View
  37. Persky S, Kistler W, Klein W, Ferrer R. Internet Versus Virtual Reality Settings for Genomics Information Provision. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 2019;22(1):7 View
  38. Nyström M, Hassmén P, Sörman D, Wigforss T, Andersson G, Carlbring P, Martino G. Are physical activity and sedentary behavior related to depression?. Cogent Psychology 2019;6(1) View
  39. Eklund C, Elfström M, Eriksson Y, Söderlund A, Travlos A. Development of the web application My Stress Control—Integrating theories and existing evidence. Cogent Psychology 2018;5(1):1489457 View
  40. Hodson J, Feng G. An ecological model of climate marketing: A conceptual framework for understanding climate science related attitude and behavior change. Cogent Social Sciences 2019;5(1) View
  41. Mittendorf K, Kauffman T, Amendola L, Anderson K, Biesecker B, Dorschner M, Duenas D, Eubanks D, Feigelson H, Gilmore M, Hunter J, Joseph G, Kraft S, Lee S, Leo M, Liles E, Lindberg N, Muessig K, Okuyama S, Porter K, Riddle L, Rolf B, Rope A, Zepp J, Jarvik G, Wilfond B, Goddard K. Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM): A clinical trial assessing a multimodal cancer genetics services delivery program and its impact on diverse populations. Contemporary Clinical Trials 2021;106:106432 View
  42. Bourdon J, Dorsey A, Zalik M, Pietka A, Salyer P, Bray M, Bierut L, Ramsey A. In-vivo design feedback and perceived utility of a genetically-informed smoking risk tool among current smokers in the community. BMC Medical Genomics 2021;14(1) View
  43. Haga S, Barry W, Mills R, Svetkey L, Suchindran S, Willard H, Ginsburg G. Impact of Delivery Models on Understanding Genomic Risk for Type 2 Diabetes. Public Health Genomics 2014;17(2):95 View
  44. Shickh S, Hirjikaka D, Clausen M, Kodida R, Mighton C, Reble E, Sam J, Panchal S, Aronson M, Graham T, Armel S, Glogowski E, Elser C, Eisen A, Carroll J, Shuman C, Seto E, Baxter N, Scheer A, Shastri-Estrada S, Feldman G, Thorpe K, Schrader K, Lerner-Ellis J, Kim R, Faghfoury H, Bombard Y. Genetics Adviser: a protocol for a mixed-methods randomised controlled trial evaluating a digital platform for genetics service delivery. BMJ Open 2022;12(4):e060899 View
  45. Hamilton J, Genoff Garzon M, Shah I, Cadet K, Shuk E, Westerman J, Hay J, Offit K, Robson M. Illustrating Cancer Risk: Patient Risk Communication Preferences and Interest regarding a Novel <b><i>BRCA1/2</i></b> Genetic Risk Modifier Test. Public Health Genomics 2020;23(1-2):6 View
  46. Kaphingst K. Future Forecasting for Research and Practice in Genetic Literacy. Public Health Genomics 2023;26(1):159 View
  47. Gootzen T, Kalra A, Sarig K, Sobočan M, Oxley S, Dworschak N, Georgiannakis A, Glynou S, Taniskidi A, Ganesan S, Ferris M, Legood R, Eeles R, Evans D, Fierheller C, Manchanda R. Online Provision of BRCA1 and BRCA2 Health Information: A Search Engine Driven Systematic Web-Based Analysis. Cancers 2024;16(13):2324 View

Books/Policy Documents

  1. Hesse B. Principles and Concepts of Behavioral Medicine. View