The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic strategies for population screening in hemochromatosis: Assessment of anxiety, depression, and perception of health

Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic strategies for population screening in hemochromatosis: Assessment of anxiety, depression, and perception of health
Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic strategies for population screening in hemochromatosis: Assessment of anxiety, depression, and perception of health
Purpose: Hemochromatosis is a treatable disorder with a major genetic predisposition. It provides an example in which genotypic and phenotypic strategies for screening may be compared. We previously showed noninferiority of uptake of a genotypic population screening strategy for hemochromatosis compared with a phenotypic strategy. In this article we present the psychologic effects of each strategy.
Methods: A sample of 3000 individuals from primary care were randomly allocated to a phenotypic or genotypic screening strategy for hemochromatosis, and the 939 individuals who accepted screening provide the sample for this article. Standardized assessments of anxiety, general health, and depression were made at invitation, testing, result-giving, and 6 months.
Results: Screening did not lead to significant changes in the self-rated assessments of anxiety, depression, and general health over time, and there were no significant differences between the two screening strategies. The unemployed or permanently disabled had lower ratings of health and higher anxiety and depression.
Conclusion: The two screening strategies appeared to cause little adverse psychologic disturbance in the short term, and there was no difference between the two strategies This study provides some empiric data to support arguments against "genetic exceptionalism" and suggests that genetic testing when used for population screening for a treatable disease has few adverse effects.
1098-3600
550-556
Patch, Christine
b25a4961-4115-4516-ba1b-36c576736b06
Roderick, Paul
dbb3cd11-4c51-4844-982b-0eb30ad5085a
Rosenberg, William
cea47565-06a3-4622-931c-aa5a7686865c
Patch, Christine
b25a4961-4115-4516-ba1b-36c576736b06
Roderick, Paul
dbb3cd11-4c51-4844-982b-0eb30ad5085a
Rosenberg, William
cea47565-06a3-4622-931c-aa5a7686865c

Patch, Christine, Roderick, Paul and Rosenberg, William (2005) Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic strategies for population screening in hemochromatosis: Assessment of anxiety, depression, and perception of health. Genetics in Medicine, 7 (8), 550-556.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Purpose: Hemochromatosis is a treatable disorder with a major genetic predisposition. It provides an example in which genotypic and phenotypic strategies for screening may be compared. We previously showed noninferiority of uptake of a genotypic population screening strategy for hemochromatosis compared with a phenotypic strategy. In this article we present the psychologic effects of each strategy.
Methods: A sample of 3000 individuals from primary care were randomly allocated to a phenotypic or genotypic screening strategy for hemochromatosis, and the 939 individuals who accepted screening provide the sample for this article. Standardized assessments of anxiety, general health, and depression were made at invitation, testing, result-giving, and 6 months.
Results: Screening did not lead to significant changes in the self-rated assessments of anxiety, depression, and general health over time, and there were no significant differences between the two screening strategies. The unemployed or permanently disabled had lower ratings of health and higher anxiety and depression.
Conclusion: The two screening strategies appeared to cause little adverse psychologic disturbance in the short term, and there was no difference between the two strategies This study provides some empiric data to support arguments against "genetic exceptionalism" and suggests that genetic testing when used for population screening for a treatable disease has few adverse effects.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2005

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 24460
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/24460
ISSN: 1098-3600
PURE UUID: a3b2509e-20a3-47ad-baf4-952f4a45bab9
ORCID for Paul Roderick: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-9475-6850

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 30 Mar 2006
Last modified: 09 Jan 2022 02:47

Export record

Contributors

Author: Christine Patch
Author: Paul Roderick ORCID iD
Author: William Rosenberg

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×