Knowledge and misconceptions of the French population regarding medical genetics: a survey of 3,000 respondents
MERCIER, S.; PETIT, F.; MISRAHI, M.; BERTA, P.; CAMBON-THOMSEN, A.; CHAUMETTE, B.; CHNEIWEISS, H.; CRETOLLE, C.; EDERY, P.; HEARD, D.; KONYUKH, M.; LAENG, C.; MAHLAOUI, N.; PASQUIER, L.; PLUTINO, M.; ODENT, S.; STOPPA-LYONNET, D.; "Genetics and the General Public" FFGH Ethics Working Group,
Show abstract
Advances in high-throughput sequencing and genetic research have expanded the role of genetics in medicine and society. Population-based screening programs, including neonatal and preconception testing, are increasingly implemented globally, alongside the rise of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. The "Genetics and the General Public" Ethics Working Group of the French Federation of Human Genetics (FFGH) assessed knowledge and awareness of genetics within the French population through a nationally representative survey (n=3,013) conducted by the polling firm Ipsos bva. Results indicated that 69% of respondents report an interest in genetics, although their level of knowledge remains limited. Most respondents expressed positive attitudes toward genetics, perceiving it as a major source of hope in healthcare. While a majority indicated willingness to undergo genetic testing for medical purposes, they also reported legitimate concerns regarding the potential results. Despite legal restrictions, 12% reported having ordered a DTC genetic test (5% for genealogical; 5% for medical and 2% for both purposes), and 45% of non-users expressed strong interest in this type of test. Notably, there is a substantial lack of awareness regarding the limitations of these tests and the French legal framework governing their use. These findings highlight critical gaps in public knowledge, emphasizing the need for improved genetic education, including incorporating genetics into school curricula and launching targeted awareness campaigns. These initiatives should help clarify the distinctions between clinically validated genetic tests and DTC genetic testing services, addressing both their benefits and their ethical, legal, and scientific limitations, in order to promote informed decision-making.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Defining the Critical Educational Components of Informed Consent for Genetic Testing: Views of US-Based Genetic Counselors and Medical Geneticists 95%
- A Qualitative Study Exploring the Consumer Experience of Receiving Self-Initiated Polygenic Risk Scores from a Third-Party Website 93%
- Benefits and barriers to implementing precision preventive care: results of a national physician survey 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Optical genome mapping as a next-generation cytogenomic tool for detection of structural and copy number variations for prenatal genomic analyses 89%
- Evaluation of optical genome mapping in clinical genetic testing of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy 89%
- Optical Genome Mapping And Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Microarray: An Integrated Approach For Investigating Challenging Cases Of Products Of Conception 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- A step forward, but still inadequate: Australian health professionals’ views on the genetics and life insurance moratorium 95%
- How do clinician and parent reported data differ? An analysis of similarity and difference in the datasets from a cross-syndrome genetics cohort study(GenROC) 91%
- A systems approach to enhance Lynch syndrome diagnosis through tumor testing 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and evaluation of a novel educational program for providers on the use of polygenic risk scores 94%
- ClinGen Variant Curation Interface Workshops: Training Variant Scientists on an International Platform 91%
- Genetic-Ancestry Analysis on >93,000 Individuals Undergoing Expanded Carrier Screening Reveals Limitations of Ethnicity-Based Medical Guidelines 91%
Similar papers in this journal
"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.