Attitudes and beliefs regardingrace‐targetedgenetic testing of Black people: A systematic review

Author:

Iltis Ana S.1ORCID,Rolf Liz2ORCID,Yaeger Lauren2ORCID,Goodman Melody S.3ORCID,DuBois James M.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Wake Forest University

2. Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine

3. New York University School of Global Public Health

Abstract

AbstractGeographical ancestry has been associated with an increased risk of various genetic conditions. Race and ethnicity often have been used as proxies for geographical ancestry. Despite numerous problems associated with the crude reliance on race and ethnicity as proxies for geographical ancestry, some genetic testing in the clinical, research, and employment settings has been and continues to be race‐ or ethnicity‐based. Race‐based or race‐targeted genetic testing refers to genetic testing offered only or primarily to people of particular racial or ethnic groups because of presumed differences among groups. One current example isAPOL1testing of Black kidney donors. Race‐based genetic testing raises numerous ethical and policy questions. Given the ongoing reliance on the Black race in genetic testing, it is important to understand the views of people who identify as Black or are identified as Black (including African American, Afro‐Caribbean, and Hispanic Black) regarding race‐based genetic testing that targets Black people because of their race. We conducted a systematic review of studies and reports of stakeholder‐engaged projects that examined how people who identify as or are identified as Black perceive genetic testing that specifically presumes genetic differences exist among racial groups or uses race as a surrogate for ancestral genetic variation and targets Black people. Our review identified 14 studies that explicitly studied this question and another 13 that implicitly or tacitly studied this matter. We found four main factors that contribute to a positive attitude toward race‐targeted genetic testing (facilitators) and eight main factors that are associated with concerns regarding race‐targeted genetic testing (barriers). This review fills an important gap. These findings should inform future genetic research and the policies and practices developed in clinical, research, public health, or other settings regarding genetic testing.

Funder

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Genetics (clinical)

Reference197 articles.

1. ACOG Committee Opinion #325

2. American Academy of Family Physicians. (2007).Summary of recommendations for clinical preventive services: Hemoglobinopathies. Revision 6.4.http://aile.net/sunum/dersnot/SDFM/22PHE_AAFP.pdf

3. The Influence of Health Care Policies and Health Care System Distrust on Willingness to Undergo Genetic Testing

Cited by 5 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3