The Effects of Enhanced Informed Consent in a Pro-Life Pregnancy Counseling Center

The current study investigated the effects of an enhanced informed consent condition on attitudes toward a counselor, counseling situation, and decision making in a pro-life pregnancy center. The following questions were specifically addressed: (1) Would enhanced informed consent be related to increased pro-abort decisions? and (2) Would enhanced informed consent be related to more positive attitudes toward the counselor and center? Results suggested that enhanced consent did not lead to increased or decreased decisions to abort nor to differential attitudes toward the counselor or counseling setting. Results are discussed in terms of their support for the provision of full informed consent as consistent with both prevailing ethical and legal guidelines.     

A Survey of Genetic Counselors' Use of Informed Consent Documents for Prenatal Genetic Counseling Sessions

Thirty six members of the Prenatal Diagnosis Special Interest Group of the National Society of Genetic Counselors were interviewed about their use of informed consent documents for the genetic counseling component of their prenatal genetic counseling sessions and their perceptions of the utility and feasibility of such documents. Major findings include (1) None of the genetic counselors currently used a consent document describing the genetic counseling component of the session itself; (2) Only three participants stated that they had ever used an informed consent document for this component of the session; (3) They disagreed about the importance and usefulness of such a document; (4) There was variability in their reported likelihood of using a document if one were available; (5) There was a fair amount of agreement about the types of information to include on an informed consent document for genetic counseling; over half of the sample endorsed 8 of 10 topics; and (6) Participants identified 10 obstacles to using such a document. Recommendations for genetic counseling practice, policy, and research are given.     

Operationalizing the Reciprocal Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice: a Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Genomic Counseling and Testing

With the advent of widespread genomic testing for diagnostic indications and disease risk assessment, there is increased need to optimize genetic counseling services to support the scalable delivery of precision medicine. Here, we describe how we operationalized the reciprocal engagement model of genetic counseling practice to develop a framework of counseling components and strategies for the delivery of genomic results. This framework was constructed based upon qualitative research with patients receiving genomic counseling following online receipt of potentially actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomics reports. Consultation with a transdisciplinary group of investigators, including practicing genetic counselors, was sought to ensure broad scope and applicability of these strategies for use with any large-scale genomic testing effort. We preserve the provision of pre-test education and informed consent as established in Mendelian/single-gene disease genetic counseling practice. Following receipt of genomic results, patients are afforded the opportunity to tailor the counseling agenda by selecting the specific test results they wish to discuss, specifying questions for discussion, and indicating their preference for counseling modality. The genetic counselor uses these patient preferences to set the genomic counseling session and to personalize result communication and risk reduction recommendations. Tailored visual aids and result summary reports divide areas of risk (genetic variant, family history, lifestyle) for each disease to facilitate discussion of multiple disease risks. Post-counseling, session summary reports are actively routed to both the patient and their physician team to encourage review and follow-up. Given the breadth of genomic information potentially resulting from genomic testing, this framework is put forth as a starting point to meet the need for scalable genetic counseling services in the delivery of precision medicine.     

Client Perceptions of the Impact of Genetic Counseling: An Exploratory Study

Twenty-eight former genetic counseling clients seen at a major Midwestern university were recruited to be interviewed about their genetic counseling experiences, including most and least helpful aspects, what they learned, how this information impacted their decision-making, and their perceptions of their genetic counselors' behaviors. Responses were inductively analyzed, and several themes were identified, including: Clients sought genetic counseling to obtain genetic-medical information; a majority accurately recalled this information; genetic counseling influenced decisions for about 50% of the sample; decision-making was affected by several extra-session factors; a majority experienced distress during the session; most perceived genetic counselor responses as nondirective and liked this approach; counselor behaviors regarded as directive involved discussion of pregnancy termination; participants disagreed about the need for and provision of genetic counselor support; most regarded the session as helpful and stated that they would seek genetic counseling again. Suggestions for addressing these issues in practice and research are given.     

Do Undergraduate Student Research Participants Read Psychological Research Consent Forms? Examining Memory Effects,Condition Effects,and Individual Differences

Although research has examined factors influencing understanding of informed consent in biomedical and forensic research, less is known about participants' attention to details in consent documents in psychological survey research. The present study used a randomized experimental design and found the majority of participants were unable to recall information from the consent form in both in-person and online formats. Participants were also relatively poor at recognizing important aspects of the consent form including risks to participants and confidentiality procedures. Memory effects and individual difference characteristics also appeared to influence recall and recognition of consent form information.     

Sign on the Dotted Line: The Informed Consent Process (ICP) as Induced Compliance1

We investigated the social implications of signing an informed consent form (ICF) on participant behavior. ICF research fails to consider that the decision to participate in research is a process that occurs in a social and cultural context. Understanding the meaning of giving consent in this social context is critical. In separate experiments, we found significantly greater agreement to return to complete a study and persistence at a task in participants who signed the ICF versus those who did not. Signing the ICF may be putting participants at risk of induced compliance with study protocols, rather than empowering them to withhold consent or withdraw. Future research should investigate the psychosocial factors affecting participants' decision making in the informed consent process.     

Points to Consider in the Clinical Use of NGS Panels for Mitochondrial Disease: An Analysis of Gene Inclusion and Consent Forms

Mitochondrial next generation sequencing (NGS) panels offer single-step analysis of the numerous nuclear genes involved in the structure, function, and maintenance of mitochondria. However, the complexities of mitochondrial biology and genetics raise points for consideration in clinical use of these tests. To understand the current status of mitochondrial genetic testing, we assessed the gene offerings and consent forms of mitochondrial NGS panels available from seven US-based clinical laboratories. The NGS panels varied markedly in number of genes (101–1204 genes), and the proportion of genes causing “classic” mitochondrial diseases and their phenocopies ranged widely between labs (18 %–94 % of panel contents). All panels included genes not associated with classic mitochondrial diseases (6 %–28 % of panel contents), including genes causing adult-onset neurodegenerative disorders, cancer predisposition, and other genetic syndromes or inborn errors of metabolism. Five of the panels included genes that are not listed in OMIM to be associated with a disease phenotype (5 %–49 % of panel contents). None of the consent documents reviewed had options for patient preference regarding receipt of incidental findings. These findings raise points of discussion applicable to mitochondrial diagnostics, but also to the larger arenas of exome and genome sequencing, including the need to consider the boundaries between clinical and research testing, the necessity of appropriate informed consent, and the responsibilities of clinical laboratories and clinicians. Based on these findings, we recommend careful evaluation by laboratories of the genes offered on NGS panels, clear communication of the predicted phenotypes, and revised consent forms to allow patients to make choices about receiving incidental findings. We hope that our analysis and recommendations will help to maximize the considerable clinical utility of NGS panels for the diagnosis of mitochondrial disease.     

Psychology of the Informed Consent Process: A Commentary on Three Recent Articles

In conducting research on humans, respect for human dignity requires investigators to obtain informed consent. Institutional pressures, however, often reduce the informed consent form to a signature on a document. Unfortunately, people often do not read or understand these documents. In the present effort, we argue that the key problem here arises because investigators often do not take into account the psychology of participants. Based on 3 articles, we argue that informed consent requires investigators to help participants “make sense” of a study, and its implications, for both themselves and others. Informed consent procedures that might encourage participant sensemaking are discussed.     

Stakeholders’ Opinions on the Implementation of Pediatric Whole Exome Sequencing: Implications for Informed Consent

Advances in whole genome and whole exome sequencing (WGS/WES) technologies have led to increased availability in clinical settings. Currently, there are few guidelines relating to the process and content of informed consent for WGS/WES, nor to which results should be returned to families. To address this gap, we conducted focus groups to assess the views of professionals, parents, and adolescents for the future implementation of WES. The discussions assessed understanding of the risks and benefits of WES, preferences for the informed consent discussion, process for return of results, and the decision-making role of the pediatric patient. Professional focus group participants included bioethicists, physicians, laboratory directors, and genetic counselors. Parent focus groups included individuals with children who could be offered sequencing due to a potential genetic cause of the child’s condition. On-line discussion groups were conducted with adolescents aged 13–17 who had a possible genetic disorder. We identified discrepancies between professionals and patient groups regarding the process and content of informed consent, preference for return of results, and the role of the child in decision-making. Professional groups were concerned with the uncertainty regarding professional obligations, changing interpretation in genomic medicine, and practical concerns of returning results over time. Parent and adolescent groups focused on patient choice and personal utility of sequencing results. Each group expressed different views on the role of the child in decision-making and return of results. These discrepancies represent potential barriers to informed consent and a challenge for genetic counselors regarding the involvement of pediatric patients in decision-making and return of results discussions.     

Noninvasive Prenatal Testing/Noninvasive Prenatal Diagnosis: the Position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

The 1997 discovery of free fetal DNA in maternal plasma launched clinical researchers’ efforts to establish a reliable method for non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal genetic conditions. Various methods, including, but not limited to, massively parallel sequencing (MPS) and selective analysis of cell-free fetal DNA in maternal plasma, have recently been developed as highly sensitive and specific noninvasive screening tools for common fetal chromosome aneuploidies. Incorporating these new noninvasive technologies into clinical practice will impact the current prenatal screening paradigm for fetal aneuploidy, in which genetic counseling plays an integral role. The National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) currently supports Noninvasive Prenatal Testing/Noninvasive Prenatal Diagnosis (NIPT/NIPD) as an option for patients whose pregnancies are considered to be at an increased risk for certain chromosome abnormalities. NSGC urges that NIPT/NIPD only be offered in the context of informed consent, education, and counseling by a qualified provider, such as a certified genetic counselor. Patients whose NIPT/NIPD results are abnormal, or who have other factors suggestive of a chromosome abnormality, should receive genetic counseling and be given the option of standard confirmatory diagnostic testing.     

Essential Elements of Genetic Cancer Risk Assessment, Counseling, and Testing: Updated Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Updated from their original publication in 2004, these cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of counseling at-risk individuals through genetic cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Essential components include the intake, cancer risk assessment, genetic testing for an inherited cancer syndrome, informed consent, disclosure of genetic test results, and psychosocial assessment. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.     

Views of Genetics Health Professionals on the Return of Genomic Results

As exome and whole genome sequencing become clinically available, the potential to receive a large number of clinically relevant but incidental results is a significant challenge in the provision of genomic counseling. We conducted three focus groups of a total of 35 individuals who were members of ASHG and/or NSGC, assessing views towards the return of genomic results. Participants stressed that patient autonomy was primary. There was consensus that a mechanism to return results to the healthcare provider, rather than patient, and to streamline integration into the electronic health record would ensure these results had the maximal impact on patient management. All three focus groups agreed that pharmacogenomic results were reasonable to return and that they were not felt to be stigmatizing. With regard to the return of medically relevant results, there was much debate. Participants had difficulty in consistently assigning specific diseases to ‘bins’ that were considered obligatory versus optional for disclosure. Consensus was reached regarding the importance of informed consent and pretest counseling visits to clarify what the return of results process would entail. Evidence based professional guidelines should continue to be developed and regularly revised to assist in consistently and appropriately providing genomic results to patients.     

Lynch Syndrome Patients’ Views of and Preferences for Return of Results Following Whole Exome Sequencing

Whole exome sequencing (WES) uses next generation sequencing technology to provide information on nearly all functional, protein-coding regions in an individual’s genome. Due to the vast amount of information and incidental findings that can be generated from this technology, patient preferences must be investigated to help clinicians consent and return results to patients. Patients (n?=?19) who were previously clinically diagnosed with Lynch syndrome, but received uninformative negative Lynch syndrome genetic results through traditional molecular testing methods participated in semi-structured interviews after WES testing but before return of results to explore their views of WES and preferences for return of results. Analyses of interview results found that nearly all participants believed that the benefits of receiving all possible results generated from WES outweighed the undesirable effects. The majority of participants conveyed that relative to coping with a cancer diagnosis, information generated from WES would be manageable. Importantly, participants’ experience with Lynch syndrome influenced their notions of genetic determinism, tolerance for uncertain results, and family communication plans. Participants would prefer to receive WES results in person from a genetic counselor or medical geneticist so that an expert could help explain the meaning and implications of the potentially large quantity and range of complicated results. These results underscore the need to study various populations with regard to the clinical use of WES in order to effectively and empathetically communicate the possible implications of this new technology and return results.     

Research Participants’ Preferences for Hypothetical Secondary Results from Genomic Research

Secondary or incidental results can be identified in genomic research that increasingly uses whole exome/genome sequencing. Understanding research participants’ preferences for secondary results and what influences these decisions is important for patient education, counseling, and consent, and for the development of policies regarding return of secondary results. Two hundred nineteen research participants enrolled in genomic studies were surveyed regarding hypothetical preferences for specific types of secondary results, and these preferences were correlated with demographic information and psychosocial data. The majority of research participants (73%) indicated a preference to learn about all results offered, with no clear pattern regarding which results were not desired by the remaining participants. Participants who reported greater interest in genetic privacy were less likely to indicate a preference to learn all results, as were individuals who self-identified as Jewish. Although most research participants preferred to receive all secondary results offered, a significant subset preferred to exclude some results, suggesting that an all-or-none policy would not be ideal for all participants. The correlations between preferences to receive secondary results, religious identification, and privacy concerns demonstrate the need for culturally sensitive counseling and educational materials accessible to all education levels to allow participants to make the best choices for themselves.     

When clinical care is like research: the need for review and consent

The prevailing “segregated model” for understanding clinical research sharply separates it from clinical care and subjects it to extensive regulations and guidelines. This approach is based on the fact that clinical research relies on procedures and methods—research biopsies, blinding, randomization, fixed treatment protocols, placebos—that pose risks and burdens to participants in order to collect data that might benefit all patients. Reliance on these methods raises the potential for exploitation and unfairness, and thus points to the need for independent ethical review and more extensive informed consent. In contrast, it is widely assumed that clinical care does not raise these ethical concerns because it is designed to promote the best interests of individual patients. The segregation of clinical research from clinical care has been largely effective at protecting research participants. At the same time, this approach ignores the fact that several aspects of standard clinical care, such as clinician training and scheduling, also pose some risks and burdens to present patients for the benefit of all patients. We argue that recently proposed learning health care systems offer a way to address this concern, and better protect patients, by developing integrated review and consent procedures. Specifically, current approaches base the need for independent ethical review and more extensive informed consent on whether an activity is categorized as clinical research or clinical care. An ethically sounder approach, which could be incorporated into learning health care systems, would be to base the need for independent ethical review and more extensive informed consent on the extent to which an activity poses risks to present patients for the benefit of all patients.     

Genetic research,adolescents, and informed consent

The participation of adolescents in genetic research engenders unusual problems concerning the nature of their informed consent. In this study we analyze 70 consent documents collected from genetics investigators in the United States who conduct research with children and adolescents. We find that many consent documents do not reflect either the current or the developing ethical and legal standards for research with adolescents and that in many cases the documents are simply confusing or unclear. We make recommendations for change to reflect more adequately the changing perspective concerning the autonomous decision-making capacity of adolescents.     

Effects of Involving Conduct Problem Adolescents in the Setting of Counseling Goals

Effects of involving conduct problem adolescents in the setting of individual counseling goals were examined. Four levels of goal setting involvement were copmared with high school pupils referred for behavioral counseling in an urban public high school. The four levels were: Level 1-a pupil was directly invovled with a counselor in the goal setting process. Level 2-a pupil was informed that goals were being set by a counselor but pupil did not participate in the process. Level 3-goals were set by a counselor and pupil was neither informed nor involved. Level 4-no explicit counseling goal was set. Three school counselors employed a different level of goal setting for individual behavioral counseling with a different set of pupils during each quarter of the school year. Direct involvement of pupils in goal setting (Level 1) and knowledge that goals were being set for them (Level 2) led to greater amounts of goal attainment than was the case when pupils were not informed of goals (level 3) or when no explicit goal was set (Level 4). Direct involvement in goal setting was associated with highest degrees of pupil satisfaction with counseling. Results are discussed within the context of an increased concern among public school educators for development of effective means to assist the high school pupil with conduct problems. Directions for additional investigations are briefly noted.     

Genomic Testing: a Genetic Counselor’s Personal Reflection on Three Years of Consenting and Testing

Whole exome sequencing (WES) is increasingly used in research and clinical genetics as the cost of sequencing decreases and the interpretation improves. Genetic counselors need to be prepared to counsel a diverse patient population for this complex test. This commentary is a reflection of one genetic counselor’s experiences in counseling, consenting, and returning results for clinical and research WES for over 120 participants and patients. She reflects on how she overcame the initial challenges and concerns of counseling for WES and how her counseling evolved from a teaching based counseling model to an interactive patient-center counseling model. Her insights are offered to prepare other genetic counselors for the growing use of genomic testing.