Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36542454›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2022

Perspectives of Rare Disease Social Media Group Participants on Engaging With Genetic Counselors: Mixed Methods Study.

Megan Yabumoto, Emily Miller, Anoushka Rao, Holly K Tabor, Kelly E Ormond, Meghan C Halley

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Whither social media and clinical genetics?American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2023
    Review
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

6 authors.

Megan YabumotoDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-7569-9299
Emily MillerStanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4384-7116
Anoushka RaoStanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0428-9254
Holly K TaborStanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1005-5008
Kelly E OrmondDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1033-0818
Meghan C HalleyStanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5031-9840

Funding

Surfacing values in the economic evaluation of genomic sequencing for diagnosis of children with rare diseasesK01HG011341 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI HALLEY, MEGHAN · 2021 to 2025
$868k
NHGRI NIH HHS K01 HG011341
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSocial media provides a potential avenue for genetic counselors to address gaps in access to reliable genetics information for rare disease communities. However, only limited research has examined patient and family attitudes toward engaging with genetic counselors through social media.

objectiveOur study assessed the attitudes of members of rare disease social media groups toward engaging with genetic counselors through social media, characteristics associated with greater interest, and the benefits and potential pitfalls of various approaches to such engagement.

methodsWe conducted a mixed methods survey of patients and family members recruited from a systematic sample of rare disease Facebook groups. Patient characteristics and their associations with interest in engagement with genetic counselors were evaluated using univariate and bivariate statistics. Responses to open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic content analysis.

resultsIn total, 1053 individuals from 103 rare disease groups participated. The median overall interest in engaging with genetic counselors on social media was moderately high at 7.0 (IQR 4.0-9.0, range 0-10). No past experience with a genetic counselor was associated with greater interest in engaging with one through social media (µ=6.5 vs 6.0, P=.04). Participants expressed greatest interest (median 9.0, IQR 5.0-10.0) in engagement models allowing direct communication with genetic counselors, which was corroborated by the majority (n=399, 61.3%) of individuals who responded to open-ended questions explicitly stating their interest in 1-on-1 interactions. When asked what forms of support they would request from genetic counselors through social media, participants desired individualized support and information about how to access services. However, participants also expressed concerns regarding privacy and confidentiality.

conclusionsPatients and family members in rare disease social media groups appear interested in engaging with genetic counselors through social media, particularly for individualized support. This form of engagement on social media is not meant to replace the current structure and content of genetic counseling (GC) services, but genetic counselors could more actively use social media as a communication tool to address gaps in knowledge and awareness about genetics services and gaps in accessible patient information. Although encouraging, concerns regarding privacy and feasibility require further consideration, pointing to the need for professional guidelines in this area.

Indexed as

CounselorsSocial MediaFamilyGenetic CounselingHumansRare Diseasesdelivery of health caregenetic counselinggeneticsgenomicsrare diseasesocial media

Identifiers

PMID36542454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.