Search

Purpose: With few exceptions, research on consumer genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk has focused on tests with limited predictive value and clinical utility. Our study advances the existing literature by exploring the experiences and behaviors of individuals who have taken modern consumer genetic tests for cancer susceptibility that, unlike earlier tests, screen for medically significant variants. Methods: We interviewed 30 individuals who had undergone consumer genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk between 2014 and 2019. We explored participants' pre-test sentiments (7 items), experiences receiving results (5 items), behavioral and health-related changes (6 items), and attitudes and beliefs (3 items). Data were analyzed for thematic content. Results: Most participants reported a personal (n = 6) and/or family history (n = 24) of cancer, which influenced their choice to pursue testing. Before testing, most participants did not consult with a physician (n = 25) or receive genetic counseling (n = 23). Nevertheless, the majority felt that they understood testrelated information (n = 20) and their results (n = 20), though a considerable number reported experiencing negative emotions related to their results. Most also shared their results with family members (n = 27). Overall, participants' attitudes towards consumer genetic testing for cancer risk were predominantly positive (n = 23). Conclusion: This study offers new insights into how individuals use and perceive modern consumer genetic tests for hereditary cancer risk, focusing on their perceptions of the risks, benefits, and limitations of these services. Understanding test-takers' perspectives can potentially inform improvements aimed at ensuring that tests meet users' needs and deliver clinically valuable genetic risk assessments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the provision of telehealth genetic counseling (THGC) services continues to expand, it is imperative that genetic counseling students gain proficiency in telehealth service delivery. To prepare students to provide THGC services, the MSGC program at the University of Pennsylvania has included didactic sessions on THGC, THGC role plays, THGC standardized patient sessions, and THGC fieldwork experiences and clinical rotations. This article highlights best practices in THGC and guidance for Master of Science in Genetic Counseling (MSGC) programs training the next generation of genetic counselors providing THGC services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The genetic counseling profession has attempted to enhance the diversity of its workforce since its inception but does not yet reflect the demographics of the United States. One barrier to entry into genetic counseling programs may be the ability to gain exposure to the profession prior to applying for entry. Many applicants participate in unpaid shadowing experiences, which could be a limitation to students from underrepresented backgrounds who may be less familiar with the field or who cannot forgo a salary. To address this concern, the University of Pennsylvania Master of Science in Genetic Counseling Program developed a six‐week, paid summer internship designed for undergraduates interested in genetic counseling and from underrepresented backgrounds in the field. Students were recruited via social media and word of mouth. Three undergraduates participated in the first year and four in the second year. Participants received lectures on basic topics in genetics and medical genetics, engaged in workshops and panel discussions, attended rounds and case conferences, interacted with genetic counseling mentors, and were able to shadow genetic counselors in the clinic. Benefits to the interns included enhanced appreciation for the field, development of connections with practicing genetic counselors, and development of connections with each other. The program received positive and constructive feedback and has been continued for future summers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study investigated the status of student health center nutrition services. Surveys completed by directors of 168 centers indicated that 79 percent provided some nutrition education and 96 percent had one-to-one counseling. Larger institutions were more likely to have nutrition programs. Registered dietitians were the typical service providers. (SM)