Reported referral for genetic counseling or BRCA 1/2 testing among United States physicians: a vignette-based study.

 Blogger's Note: in the absence of the full paper ($$$) conclusions should be viewed with caution (eg. detailed reasons, albeit summarized in the abstract...) because....the conclusion do not make sense. 

Please post a message IF this paper is available elsewhere in open text publishing format.

 BACKGROUND:

Genetic counseling and testing is recommended for women at high but not average risk of ovarian cancer. National estimates of physician adherence to genetic counseling and testing recommendations are lacking.

METHODS:

Using a vignette-based study, we surveyed 3200 United States family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician/gynecologists and received 1878 (62%) responses. The questionnaire included an annual examination vignette asking about genetic counseling and testing. The vignette varied patient age, race, insurance status, and ovarian cancer risk. Estimates of physician adherence to genetic counseling and testing recommendations were weighted to the United States primary care physician population.

 CONCLUSION:

Physicians reported that they would refer many average-risk women and would not refer many high-risk women for genetic counseling/testing. Intervention efforts, including promotion of accurate risk assessment, are needed.

Framework Needed for Research Ethics Review During Public Health Emergencies

Note: discussion with particular reference to SARS (2003).

blog author's opinion: the most interesting/important comment in the article might be the following, as below. The larger question is the resulting action.

"Provide guidance and education on the important differences between public health research and practice to foster consistency in application of the differences and on how to recognize when projects proposed during emergencies cross the line from practice to research."