Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30912305›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics2019

Attitudes toward the right to autonomous decision-making in psychiatric genetic testing: Controversial and context-dependent.

Jana Strohmaier, Stephanie H Witt, Josef Frank, Noemi Lemme, Laura Flatau, Fabian Streit, Jerome C Foo, Markus Reitt, Dan Rujescu, Thomas G Schulze and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Drama as a Powerful Tool to Enrich Socio-scientific Argumentation.International journal of science and mathematics education · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Attitudes toward the right to autonomous decision-making in psychiatric genetic testing: Controversial and context-dependent.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jana StrohmaierDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4364-1487
Stephanie H WittDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1571-1468
Josef FrankDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4867-9465
Noemi LemmeDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Laura FlatauInstitute of Psychiatric Phenomics and Genomics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3788-9128
Fabian StreitDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1080-4339
Jerome C FooDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1067-5725
Markus ReittSection of Psychiatric Genetics, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Medical Center, Georg-August-University, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5685-3887
Dan RujescuDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1432-313X
Thomas G SchulzeInstitute of Psychiatric Phenomics and Genomics, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6624-2975
Dirk LanzerathGerman Reference Centre for Ethics in the Life Sciences (DRZE), Bonn, Germany.
Franciska IllesDepartment of Psychiatry, Ruhr University Bochum, LWL-University Hospital, Bochum, Germany.
Franziska DegenhardtInstitute of Human Genetics, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1685-8904
Marcella RietschelDepartment of Genetic Epidemiology in Psychiatry, Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5236-6149

Funding

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01ZX1314ABundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung 01ZX1314GFP7 Health 602450German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) 01ZX1314AGerman Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) 01ZX1314G
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent breakthroughs in psychiatric genetics have identified genetic risk factors of yet unknown clinical value. A main ethical principal in the context of psychiatric research as well as future clinical genetic testing is the respect for a person's autonomy to decide whether to undergo genetic testing, and whom to grant access to genetic data. However, experience within the psychiatric genetic research setting has indicated controversies surrounding attitudes toward this ethical principal. This study aimed to explore attitudes concerning the right of individuals to self-determine testing and disclosure of results, and to determine whether these attitudes are context-dependent, that is, not directly related to the test result but rather to specific circumstances. N = 160 individuals with major depression or bipolar disorder and n = 29 relatives of individuals with either illness completed an online-questionnaire assessing attitudes toward genetic testing, genetic research, disclosure of results, incidental findings, and access to psychiatric genetic test results. Generally, the right of the person's autonomy was considered very important, but attitudes varied. For example, half of those who considered that children should have the right to refuse psychiatric genetic testing even against their parents' will, also state that they should be tested upon their parents' wishes. Also, the majority of respondents considered the physician entitled to disregard their stated wishes concerning the disclosure of incidental findings in case of good treatment options. Thus, researchers and clinicians must be aware that attitudes toward psychiatric genetic testing are often mutable and should discuss these prior to testing.

Indexed as

AdultAttitudeAttitude to HealthBipolar DisorderDecision MakingDisclosureFemaleGenetic CounselingGenetic ResearchGenetic TestingGenomicsHumansMajor Depressive DisorderMaleMental DisordersRisk Factorsambivalenceprivacypsychiatric genetic testingright to self-determination

Identifiers

PMID30912305
PMCPMC6899643

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.