An exploration of healthcare providers learning needs and strategies for engagement in Polygenic Risk education
Clark, A.; Wallingford, C. K.; Berkman, J.; McInerney-Leo, A.; Nisselle, A.; Terrill, B.; Palpant, N.; Young, M.-A.; James, P.; Yanes, T.
Show abstract
Polygenic risk scores (PRS) provide an estimate of the genetic contribution to health conditions. Despite increasing clinical translation, healthcare providers (HPs) report a lack of PRS knowledge, representing a major barrier to safe and effective use in practice. This study aimed to i) identify HPs learning and resource needs for PRS delivery, and ii) outline strategies to best engage clinicians in PRS education, with findings used to inform the co-design of an educational program. To ensure informed responses, genetic healthcare providers with prior experience using PRS, and/or who had completed PRS education were recruited to participate in focus groups (n=30). Recordings were transcribed and content analysis conducted with themes mapped to the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation model for Behavior change (COM-B) to identify strategies to engage providers in PRS education. Among this cohort of experienced providers, residual PRS-related knowledge, skills and implementation gaps were frequently noted. Two themes encompassed PRS learning and resource needs: i) PRS specific knowledge base including fundamental principles, understanding clinical guidelines and test limitations, and ii) communication skills needed to discuss results and facilitate risk management and health behavior changes. Themes mapped to capability included access to training and time-poorness as a primary barrier. Limited awareness of educational initiatives, including practice resources and position statements from professional bodies, was noted. Opportunities comprised of building on existing workplace training and activities such as multidisciplinary team meetings and journal clubs. All participants noted that motivation for completing PRS training was primarily driven by a desire to improve patient-centered care and clinical outcomes. Findings highlight the complexity of PRS education and priority learning areas and will be used to inform the development of tailored PRS education for HPs to support implementation of PRS into clinical research and practice.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and evaluation of a novel educational program for providers on the use of polygenic risk scores 97%
- Using Coincidence Analysis to Identify Causal Chains of Factors Associated with Implementation and Optimization of Lynch Syndrome Tumor Screening Across Multiple Health care Systems 96%
- ClinGen Variant Curation Interface Workshops: Training Variant Scientists on an International Platform 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Qualitative Study Exploring the Consumer Experience of Receiving Self-Initiated Polygenic Risk Scores from a Third-Party Website 95%
- Benefits and barriers to implementing precision preventive care: results of a national physician survey 95%
- Defining the Critical Educational Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing: Views of US-Based Genetic Counselors and Medical Geneticists 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Factors Influencing Precision Medicine Knowledge and Attitudes 93%
- Feedback of Individual Genetic and Genomics Research Results: A Qualitative Study Involving Grassroots Communities in Uganda 93%
- Sources of Successful Participant Engagement in a Public Health Research Study: a Focus on a Latino Community 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- A Pooled Electronic Consultation Program to Improve Access to Genetics Specialists 93%
- Evaluation of DNA-poli: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial to assess a digital platform for family cascade genetic testing and predictive genetic counselling 90%
- Early Diagnosis of Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Through AI-Powered Facial Analysis: Results from the Montalcino Aortic Consortium 85%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.