Attitude and awareness of the public toward genetic testing in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwara, Saudi Arabia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20231780Keywords:
Gene mapping, Screening, Off-spring, Diagnosing, Cancer, Genetic bankingAbstract
Background: Genetic testing is a growing field that can provide valuable information about an individual's health, ancestry, and potential risks for various health conditions. While some people are aware of its potential benefits, others have concerns about the privacy of their genetic data, limitations of the testing, ethical issues, and disparities in access to testing and interpretation services. While genetic testing has the potential to provide valuable information, there are valid concerns about privacy, accuracy, and ethical issues. The public's attitudes toward genetic testing is shaped by various factors, including accessibility, cost, accuracy, and reliability of the testing and ethical and privacy concerns. A survey-based methodology was used to investigate the attitudes and awareness of the public toward genetic testing and identify the factors that influence these attitudes and awareness. Our study aimed to study the attitude and awareness of Saudi medical and non-medical students toward gene testing across different Universities in Al Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 274 participants. The data were analyzed descriptively using statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS).
Results: Across the 274 participants, the majority have agreed on the importance of gene studying especially in facilitating the marriage process and assuring healthier generations, while there was also a concern about the security and confidentiality of gene mapping and banking, screening for cancer, and cardiac disorder were on top of interest among the participants to use gene screening in.
Conclusions: In conclusion, genetic testing is essential for diagnosing genetic diseases, but predictive genetic tests have limited benefits due to gene-environment interactions. Advances in genome technologies have produced large amounts of sensitive genetic data. Genetic education is necessary to promote informed decision-making, reduce genetic essentialism, and improve genomics literacy. Most study participants acknowledged the significance of genetic disorder screening before marriage to improve their health and their offspring's health.
Metrics
References
Fulda KG, Lykens K. Ethical issues in predictive genetic testing: a public health perspective. J Med Ethics. 2006;32(3):143-7.
Alliance G. Screening Services TNYMAC for G and N. Understanding Genetics: A New York, Mid-Atlantic Guide for Patients and Health Professionals. Genetic Testing. Genetic Alliance. 2009.
Roberts JS, Patterson AK, Uhlmann WR. Genetic testing for neurodegenerative diseases: Ethical and health communication challenges. Neurobiol Dis. 2020;141:104871.
Deruelle T, Kalouguina V, Trein P, Wagner J. Is there a “pandemic effect” on individuals’ willingness to take genetic tests? Eur J Hum Genet. 2023;31(3):360-2.
Courtright-Lim A, Drago M. Ethics of genetic testing. Medicine. 2020;48(10).
Pinzón-Espinosa J, van der Horst M, Zinkstok J, Austin J, Aalfs C, Batalla A, et al. Barriers to genetic testing in clinical psychiatry and ways to overcome them: from clinicians’ attitudes to sociocultural differences between patients across the globe. Translational Psychiatry. 2022;12(1).
Public health genomics in Korea | OECD Reviews of Public Health: Korea: A Healthier Tomorrow | OECD iLibrary. Available at: https://www.oecd-ilibrary. org/sites/3b1ee34f-en/index.html?itemId=/content/ component/3b1ee34f-en. Accessed on 14 February 2023.
Joly Y, Burton H, Knoppers BM, Feze IN, Dent T, Pashayan N, et al. Life insurance: genomic stratification and risk classification. Eur J Hum Genet. 2014;22(5):575-9.
Bollinger JM, Scott J, Dvoskin R, Kaufman D. Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study. Genet Med. 2012;14(4):451-7.
Etchegary H. Public attitudes toward genetic risk testing and its role in healthcare. Personalized Medicine. 2014;11(5):509-22.
Germain DP, Levade T, Hachulla E, Knebelmann B, Lacombe D, Seguin VL, et al. Challenging the traditional approach for interpreting genetic variants: Lessons from Fabry disease. Clin Genet. 2021;101(4):390-402.
Genetics and human identity. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics. Springer. 2014.
Holtzman NA, Murphy PD, Watson MS, Barr PA. Predictive genetic testing: from basic research to clinical practice. Science (New York, NY). 1997;278(5338):602-5.
Humphries SE, Ridker PM, Talmud PJ. Genetic Testing for Cardiovascular Disease Susceptibility: A Useful Clinical Management Tool or Possible Misinformation? Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. 2004;24(4):628-36.
Tierney WM. Physician inpatient order writing on microcomputer workstations. Effects on resource utilization. JAMA. 1993;269(3):379-83.
Mao R, Krautscheid P, Graham RP, Ganguly A, Shankar S, Ferber M, et al. Genetic testing for inherited colorectal cancer and polyposis, 2021 revision: a technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2021;23(10):1807-17.
Cheong JH, Wang SC, Park S, Porembka MR, Christie AL, Kim H, et al. Development and validation of a prognostic and predictive 32-gene signature for gastric cancer. Nat Com. 2022;13(1):774.
Abdul Rahim HF, Ismail SI, Hassan A, Fadl T, Khaled SM, Shockley B, et al. Willingness to participate in genome testing: a survey of public attitudes from Qatar. J Hum Genet. 2020;65(12):1067-73.
Donovan BM, Weindling M, Salazar B, Duncan A, Stuhlsatz M, Keck P. Genomics literacy matters: Supporting the development of genomics literacy through genetics education could reduce the prevalence of genetic essentialism. J Res Sci Teach. 2020;58(4):520-50.
Arafah A, ALJawadi M, ALdhaeefi M, Rehman MU. Attitude and awareness of public towards genetic testing in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2021;28(1):255-61.
Mousa O, Alali N, Alsulaiman R, Albati F, Albati F, Alietan E, et al. Public Attitudes and awareness towards Saudi Genome Program and Genetic Testing in Al Ahsa, Saudi Arabia. Zenodo. 2022. Available at: https://zenodo.org/record/6386241. Accessed on 14 February 2023.
Roberts JS, Gornick MC, Carere DA, Uhlmann WR, Ruffin MT, Green RC. Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: User Motivations, Decision Making, and Perceived Utility of Results. Public Health Genomics. 2017;20(1):36-45.
Web survey software, online surveys, and email surveys from Raosoft, Inc. Available at: http://www. raosoft.com. Accessed on 14 February 2023.
The General Authority for Statistics. The General Authority for Statistics. 2019. Available at: https://www.stats.gov.sa/. Accessed on 14 February 2023.
