Article

Twenty questions in genetic medicine--an assessment of World Wide Web databases for genetics information at the point of care.

Division of General Internal Medicine and McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland 21093, USA.
Genetics in medicine: official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics (Impact Factor: 3.92). 10/2008; 10(9):659-67.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this article was to determine the accuracy and efficiency of World Wide Web ("Web") resources to help nongeneticists answer four clinical questions about each of five common genetic conditions.
Correct answers were established by literature review. Two open-access genetics resources and seven general subscription resources were reviewed. Scoring criteria were established to define complete, partial, vague, inconsistent, not found, and wrong answers. The main outcome measures were number of answers found, accuracy, and completeness of answers. Efficiency (time per answer found) was a secondary measure.
Overall, the databases contained complete answers 33.3% of the time but contained no information as frequently (33.9%). The best database had complete answers 70% of the time, whereas the worst contained no complete answers. Five of the seven subscription databases had a total of eight wrong answers. The other two subscription databases and the two open-access genetics databases had no wrong answers. Search time ranged from 3.2 to 18.3 minutes per complete answer.
Nongeneticist providers do not have a Web resource that is accessible, accurate, and efficient to answer genetic questions that might arise in practice.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
44 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The increasing recognition regarding the relevance of genomics across the scope of nursing healthcare practice has resulted in the drive to integrate appropriate genomic knowledge and skills into nurse education and training. In this final article of the series Genetics-Genomics and Nursing Education, we will look at genetic and genomic education resources and the factors that influence both their creation and use. In considering nurse education from faculty and student perspectives, four identified areas of need have been used as the organizing constructs: guidance (what should be taught and at what level of complexity); support and training; access to genetics professionals and service users; and quality resources. This paper sets out to address the following points: (a) why there is a need for quality genomics education resources to support nurse education; (b) what is required from a resource to make it "useful" for the user; and (c) how the quality and impact of a resource can be measured. While not exhaustive, information is provided to a number of globally accessible resources, along with detailed descriptions of selected teaching or learning tools. Strategies for evaluating the suitability of a resource and suggestions on how genomic resources can be used within nurse education are provided. The use of clinically relevant resources that link theory to professional practice and which meet predefined learning outcomes and practice indicators for nurse education and training will facilitate the integration of genomics into curricula by nurse faculty. Providing clinically meaningful education and training in genomics is central to enabling every nurse to develop the appropriate knowledge and skills in genomics in order to provide optimum care to individuals and families now, and to facilitate the integration of new information and technology as it becomes available across mainstream healthcare services.
    Journal of Nursing Scholarship 12/2011; 43(4):330-40. · 1.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The availability of genetic tests for cancer susceptibility is increasing. Current tests, however, have limited clinical sensitivity. Even when clinically valid tests are available, the genetic counseling and informed consent process might not be feasible for dying patients with cancer. DNA banking preserves the opportunity for future research or clinical testing and may provide critical opportunities for surviving relatives. This study explored the current practices and potential for DNA banking for cancer susceptibility among oncologists specializing in palliative care. Palliative care oncologists actively providing clinical care for dying patients with cancer were recruited for an online survey. Descriptive statistics for DNA banking practices, perceived qualification to recommend banking, and potential predictors were assessed. Data were collected from 49 physicians (37% recruitment rate). Eighty percent reported assessing at least some patients for genetic cancer susceptibility in the past 12 months. No participants reported banking DNA for patients in the past 12 months. Only 5% reported feeling at least somewhat qualified to order DNA banking. A Web-based risk assessment tool and genetic counselor on staff were perceived as the most helpful potential resources. Despite its potential, DNA banking is not being used by palliative care oncologists.
    Journal of Oncology Practice 05/2011; 7(3):183-7.
  • Nature medicine 01/2012; 18(3):326. · 27.14 Impact Factor

Full-text

View
0 Downloads
Available from