Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 30–63 | Cite as

How Risk is Perceived, Constructed and Interpreted by Clients in Clinical Genetics, and the Effects on Decision Making: Systematic Review

  • Stephanie Sivell
  • Glyn Elwyn
  • Clara L. Gaff
  • Angus J. Clarke
  • Rachel Iredale
  • Chris Shaw
  • Joanna Dundon
  • Hazel Thornton
  • Adrian Edwards
Original Research

Abstract

As an individual’s understanding of their genetic risk may influence risk management decisions, it is important to understand the ways in which risk is constructed and interpreted. We systematically reviewed the literature, undertaking a narrative synthesis of 59 studies presenting data on the ways in which individuals perceive, construct and interpret their risk, and the subsequent effects. While most studies assessed perceived risk quantitatively, the combined evidence suggests individuals find risk difficult to accurately quantify, with a tendency to overestimate. Rather than being a stand-alone concept, risk is something lived and experienced and the process of constructing risk is complex and influenced by many factors. While evidence of the effects of perceived risk is limited and inconsistent, there is some evidence to suggest high risk estimations may adversely affect health and lead to inappropriate uptake of medical surveillance and preventative measures by some individuals. A more focused approach to research is needed with greater exploration of the ways in which risk is constructed, along with the development of stronger theoretical models, to facilitate effective and patient-centered counseling strategies.

Keywords

Genetic counseling Risk communication Risk perception Decision making Risk management Systematic review 

References

  1. Ahl, A. S., Acree, J. A., Gipson, P. S., McDowell, R. M., Miller, L., & McElvaine, M. D. (1993). Standardization of nomenclature for animal health risk analysis. Reviews of Scientific & Technical Office, 12(4), 1045–1053.Google Scholar
  2. Ajzen, I. (1985). From intention to actions: A theory of planned behaviour. In Kuhl, & Beckmann (Eds.) Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Spring.Google Scholar
  3. Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.Google Scholar
  4. AMSTAR (2005). Proposed evaluation tools for COMPUS. Retrieved from https://www.ccohta.ca/compus/compus_pdfs/COMPUS_Evaluation_Methodology_draft_e.pdf.
  5. Andrews, L., Meiser, B., Apicella, C., & Tucker, K. (2004). Psychological impact of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility in women of Ashkenazi Jewish background: A prospective study. Genetic Testing, 8(3), 240–247.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Appleton, S., Fry, A., Rees, G., Rush, R., & Cull, A. (2000). Psychosocial effects of living with an increased risk of breast cancer: An exploratory study using telephone focus groups. Psycho-Oncology, 9(6), 511–521.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Axworthy, D., Brock, D. J., Bobrow, M., & Marteau, T. M. (1996). Psychological impact of population-based carrier testing for cystic fibrosis: 3-year follow-up. UK Cystic Fibrosis Follow-Up Study Group. Lancet, 347(9013), 1443–1446.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Beck, A. T., Epstein, N., Brown, G., & Steer, R. A. (1988). An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric properties. Journal of Consultation and Clinical Psychology, 56(6), 893–897.Google Scholar
  9. Berry, D. (2007). Health communication: Theory and practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Binedell, J., Soldan, J. R., & Harper, P. S. (1998). Predictive testing for Huntington’s disease. I. Predictors of uptake in South Wales. Clinical Genetics, 54(6), 477–488.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bish, A., Sutton, S., Jacobs, C., Levene, S., Ramirez, A., & Hodgson, S. (2002a). Changes in psychological distress after cancer genetic counselling: A comparison of affected and unaffected women. British Journal of Cancer, 86(1), 43–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bish, A., Sutton, S., Jacobs, C., Levene, S., Ramirez, A., & Hodgson, S. (2002b). No news is (not necessarily) good news: Impact of preliminary results for BRCA1 mutation searches. Genetics in Medicine, 4(5), 353–358.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Bottorff, J. L., Ratner, P. A., Johnson, J. L., Lovato, C. Y., & Joab, S. A. (1998). Communicating cancer risk information: The challenges of uncertainty. Patient Education and Counseling, 33(1), 67–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Bouman, T., Luteijn, F., Albersnagel, F., & Vanderploeg, F. (1985). Enige ervaringen met de Beck depression inventory (BDI). Gedrag Tijdschr. Psychol, 13, 13–24.Google Scholar
  15. Bowen, D. J., Burke, W., McTiernan, A., Yasui, Y., & Andersen, M. R. (2004). Breast cancer risk counseling improves women’s functioning. Patient Education and Counseling, 53(1), 79–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Brain, K., Gray, J., Norman, P., France, E., Anglim, C., & Barton, G., et al. (2000). Randomized trial of a specialist genetic assessment service for familial breast cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 92(16), 1345–1351.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Brain, K., Norman, P., Gray, J., & Mansel, R. (1999). Anxiety and adherence to breast self-examination in women with a family history of breast cancer. Psychosomatic medicine, 61(2), 181–187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Brain, K., Norman, P., Gray, J., Rogers, C., Mansel, R., & Harper, P. (2002). A randomized trial of specialist genetic assessment: Psychological impact on women at different levels of familial breast cancer risk. British journal of cancer, 86(2), 233–238.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Braithwaite, D., Emery, J., Walter, F., Prevost, A. T., & Sutton, S. (2004). Psychological impact of genetic counseling for familial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 96(2), 122–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Braithwaite, D., Sutton, S., Mackay, J., Stein, J., & Emery, J. (2005). Development of a risk assessment tool for women with a family history of breast cancer. Cancer Detection & Prevention, 29(5), 433–439.Google Scholar
  21. Bringle, R. G., & Antley, R. M. (1980). Elaboration of the definition of genetic counseling into a model for counselee decision-making. Social Biology, 27(4), 304–318.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Broadstock, M., Michie, S., Gray, J., Mackay, J., & Marteau, T. M. (2000). The psychological consequences of offering mutation searching in the family for those at risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer—A pilot study. Psycho-Oncology, 9(6), 537–548.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Burke, W., Culver, J. O., Bowen, D., Lowry, D., Durfy, S., & McTiernan, A., et al. (2000). Genetic counseling for women with an intermediate family history of breast cancer. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 90(5), 361–368.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Butow, P. N., Lobb, E. A., Meiser, B., Barratt, A., & Tucker, K. M. (2003). Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counselling in breast cancer: A systematic review. Medical Journal of Australia, 178(2), 77–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Callanan, N. P., Bloom, D., Sorenson, J. R., DeVellis, B. M., & Cheuvront, B. (1995). CF carrier testing: Experience of relatives. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 4(2), 83–95.Google Scholar
  26. Case, D. O., Andrews, J. E., Johnson, J. D., & Allard, S. L. (2005). Avoiding versus seeking: The relationship of information seeking to avoidance, blunting, coping, dissonance, and related concepts. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(3), 353–362.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Croyle, R. T., & Lerman, C. (1999). Risk communication in genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Monographs, 25, 59–66.Google Scholar
  28. d’Agincourt-Canning, L. (2005). The effect of experiential knowledge on construction of risk perception in hereditary breast/ovarian cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 14(1), 55–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Decruyenaere, M., Evers-Kiebooms, G., Boogaerts, A., Cassiman, J. J., Cloostermans, T., & Demyttenaere, K., et al. (1999). Psychological functioning before predictive testing for Huntington’s disease: The role of the parental disease, risk perception, and subjective proximity of the disease. Journal of Medical Genetics, 36(12), 897–905.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Edwards, A., Elwyn, G., Covey, J., Mathews, E., & Pill, R. (2001). Presenting risk information—A review of the effects of ‘framing’ and other manipulations on patient outcomes. Journal of Health Communication, 6, 61–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Edwards, A., Sivell, S., Dundon, J., Elwyn, E., Evans, R., Gaff, C., et al. (2006). Effective risk communication in clinical genetics—A systematic review. Report to: Department of Health: Genetics Research Program—Health Services Research (Grant HSR03A; ISBN 0-9550975-2-5): Cardiff Centre for Health Sciences Research, Cardiff University.Google Scholar
  32. Ekwo, E. E., Seals, B. F., Kim, J. O., Williamson, R. A., & Hanson, J. W. (1985). Factors influencing maternal estimates of genetic risk. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 20(3), 491–504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Evans, D. G., Blair, V., Greenhalgh, R., Hopwood, P., & Howell, A. (1994). The impact of genetic counselling on risk perception in women with a family history of breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 70(5), 934–938.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Evers-Kiebooms, G., Denayer, L., Cassiman, J. J., & van den Berghe, H. (1988). Family planning decisions after the birth of a cystic fibrosis child. The impact of prenatal diagnosis. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology—Supplement, 143, 38–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Fanos, J. H., & Gatti, R. A. (1999). A mark on the arm: Myths of carrier status in sibs of individuals with ataxia-telangiectasia. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 86(4), 338–346.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Frost, S., Myers, L. B., & Newman, S. P. (2001). Genetic screening for Alzheimer’s disease: What factors predict intentions to take a test. Behavioral Medicine, 27(3), 101–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Frost, C. J., Venne, V., Cunningham, D., & Gerritsen-McKane, R. (2004). Decision making with uncertain information: Learning from women in a high risk breast cancer clinic. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 13(3), 221–236.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Frost, M. H., Walsh Vockley, C., Suman, V. J., Greene, M. H., Zahasky, K., & Hartmann, L. (2000). Perceived familial risk of cancer: Health concerns and psychosocial adjustment. Journal of Psychosocial Oncology, 18(1), 63–82.Google Scholar
  39. Gagnon, P., Massie, M. J., Kash, K. M., Gronert, M., Heerdt, A. S., & Brown, K., et al. (1996). Perception of breast cancer risk and psychological distress in women attending a surveillance program. Psycho-Oncology, 5(3), 259–269.Google Scholar
  40. Gates, E. A. (2004). Communicating risk in prenatal genetic testing. Journal of Midwifery & Women’s Health, 49(3), 220–227.Google Scholar
  41. Gigerenzer, G. (1996). The psychology of good judgement: Frequency formats and simple algorithms. Medical Decision Making, 16(3), 273–280.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Gigerenzer, G., & Edwards, A. (2003). Simple tools for understanding risks: From innumeracy to insight. British Medical Journal, 327(7417), 741–744.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Goldberg, D. (1972). The detection of psychiatric illness by questionnaire. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Gooding, H. C., Organista, K., Burack, J., & Bowles Biesecker, B. (2006). Genetic susceptibility testing from a stress and coping perspective. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 1880–1890.Google Scholar
  45. Harper, P. (2004). Practical Genetic Counselling (6th ed.). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  46. Hallowell, N., Foster, C., Eeles, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Watson, M. (2004). Accommodating risk: Responses to BRCA1/2 genetic testing of women who have had cancer. Social Science & Medicine, 59(3), 553–565.Google Scholar
  47. Hallowell, N., Green, J. M., Statham, H., Murton, F., & Richards, M. P. M. (1997). Recall of numerical risk estimates and counsellees’ perceptions of the importance of risk information following genetic counselling for breast and ovarian cancer. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 2(2), 149–159.Google Scholar
  48. Hallowell, N., Statham, H., & Murton, F. (1998). Women’s understanding of their risk of developing breast/ovarian cancer before and after genetic counseling. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 7(4), 345–364.Google Scholar
  49. Hofferbert, S., Worringen, U., Backe, J., Ruckert, E. M., White, K., & Faller, H., et al. (2000). Simultaneous interdisciplinary counseling in German breast/ovarian cancer families: First experiences with patient perceptions, surveillance behavior and acceptance of genetic testing. Genetic Counseling, 11(2), 127–146.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Hopwood, P. (2000). Breast cancer risk perception: What do we know and understand. Breast Cancer Research, 2(6), 387–391.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Hopwood, P., Howell, A., Lalloo, F., & Evans, G. (2003). Do women understand the odds? Risk perceptions and recall of risk information in women with a family history of breast cancer. Community Genetics, 6(4), 214–223.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Hopwood, P., Keeling, F., Long, A., Pool, C., Evans, G., & Howell, A. (1998). Psychological support needs for women at high genetic risk of breast cancer: Some preliminary indicators. Psycho-Oncology, 7(5), 402–412.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Hopwood, P., Shenton, A., Lalloo, F., Evans, D. G. R., & Howell, A. (2001). Risk perception and cancer worry: An exploratory study of the impact of genetic risk counselling in women with a family history of breast cancer [12]. Journal of Medical Genetics, 38(2), 139–142.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Huiart, L., Eisinger, F., Stoppa-Lyonnet, D., Lasset, C., Nogues, C., & Vennin, P., et al. (2002). Effects of genetic consultation on perception of a family risk of breast/ovarian cancer and determinants of inaccurate perception after the consultation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 55(7), 665–675.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Iredale, R., Oates-Whitehead, R., & Gray, J. (2002). Genetic service delivery for individuals at risk of familial breast cancer [protocol]. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (3).Google Scholar
  56. Janssens, A. C. J. W., Gwinn, M., Valdez, R., Narayan, K. M. V., & Khoury, M. J. (2006). Predictive genetic testing for type 2 diabetes. British Medical Journal, 333, 509–510.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Julian-Reynier, C., Eisinger, F., Chabal, F., Aurran, Y., Bignon, Y. J., & Nogues, C., et al. (1998). Cancer genetic clinics: Why do women who already have cancer attend. European Journal of Cancer, 34(10), 1549–1553.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Katapodi, M. C., Lee, K. A., Facione, N. C., & Dodd, M. J. (2004). Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: A meta-analytic review. Preventive Medicine, 38(4), 388–402.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. Keenan, K. F., Simpson, S. A., Wilson, B. J., van Teijlingen, E. R., McKee, L., & Haites, N., et al. (2005). ‘It’s their blood not mine’: Who’s responsible for (not) telling relatives about genetic risk. Health, Risk & Society, 7(3), 209–226.Google Scholar
  60. Kelly, K., Leventhal, H., Andrykowski, M., Toppmeyer, D., Much, J., & Dermody, J., et al. (2005). Using the common sense model to understand perceived cancer risk in individuals testing for BRCA 1/2 mutations. Psycho-Oncology, 14(1), 34–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Kenen, R., Ardern-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2003). Family stories and the use of heuristics: Women from suspected hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) families. Sociology of Health and Illness, 25(7), 838–865.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Kenen, R., Arden-Jones, A., & Eeles, R. (2004). We are talking, but are they listening? Communication patterns in families with a history of breast/ovarian cancer (HBOC). Psycho-Oncology, 13(5), 335–345.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Khoury, M. J. (2003). Genetics and genomics in practice: The continuum from genetic disease to genetic information in health and disease. Genetics in Medicine, 5(4), 261–268.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Langston, A. L., Robertson, J. M., Robertson, C., Campbell, M. K., Entwistle, V. A., & Marteau, T. M., et al. (2006). Protocol for stage 1 of the GaP study (Genetic testing acceptability for Paget’s disease of bone): An interview study about genetic testing and preventative treatment: Would relatives of people with Paget’s disease want testing and treatment if they were available. BMC Health Services Research, 8(6), 71.Google Scholar
  65. Laux, L., Glanzman, P., Schaffner, P., & Spielberger, C. (1981). Das State-Trait-Angstinventar (STAI). Weinheim: Beltz Tesgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  66. Leonard, K. P., Bartholomew, L., Swank, P. R., & Parcel, G. S. (1995). A comparison of two approaches to education about carrier testing for cystic fibrosis. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 4(2), 97–113.Google Scholar
  67. Lerman, C., Rimer, B. K., & Engstrom, P. F. (1991). Cancer risk notification: Psychosocial and ethical implications. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 9(7), 1275–1282.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Leventhal, H., Meyer, D., & Nerenz, D. (1980). The common-sense representation of illness danger. In Rachman (Ed.) Medical Psychology (vol. vol. 2, (pp. 7–30)). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  69. Liede, A., Metcalfe, K., Hanna, D., Hoodfar, E., Snyder, C., & Durham, C., et al. (2000). Evaluation of the needs of male carriers of mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 who have undergone genetic counseling. American Journal of Human Genetics, 67(6), 1494–1504.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Lim, J., Macluran, M., Price, M., Bennett, B., & Butow, P. (2004). Short- and long-term impact of receiving genetic mutation results in women at increased risk for hereditary breast cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 13(2), 115–133.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Loader, S., Shields, C. G., & Rowley, P. T. (2004). Impact of genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility. Genetic Testing, 8(1), 1–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. Lobb, E. A., Butow, P. N., Meiser, B., Barratt, A., Gaff, C., & Young, M. A., et al. (2003). Women’s preferences and consultants’ communication of risk in consultations about familial breast cancer: Impact on patient outcomes. Journal of Medical Genetics, 40(5), e56.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Marteau, T., & Bekker, H. (1992). The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 31(3), 301–306.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Marteau, T. M., French, D. P., Griffin, S. J., Prevost, A. T., Sutton, S. R., & Watkinson, C. (2007). Communicating genetic risk information for increasing risk-reducing behaviours [protocol] The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007 (in press).Google Scholar
  75. Marteau, T. M., Saidi, G., Goodburn, S., Lawton, J., Michie, S., & Bobrow, M. (2000). Numbers or words? A randomized controlled trial of presenting screen negative results to pregnant women. Prenatal Diagnosis, 20(9), 714–718.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Marteau, T. M., & Weinman, J. (2006). Self-regulation and the behavioral response to DNA risk information: A theoretical analysis and framework for future research. Social Science & Medicine, 62(6), 1360–1368.Google Scholar
  77. McInerney-Leo, A., Biesecker, B. B., Hadley, D. W., Kase, R. G., Giambarresi, T. R., & Johnson, E., et al. (2005). BRCA1/2 testing in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families II: Impact on relationships. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 133(2), 165–169.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Meiser, B. (2005). Psychological impact of genetic testing for cancer susceptibility: An update of the literature. Psycho-Oncology, 14(12), 1060–1074.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Meiser, B., & Dunn, S. (2000). Psychological impact of genetic testing for Huntington’s disease: An update of the literature. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 69(5), 574–578.Google Scholar
  80. Meiser, B., & Halliday, J. L. (2002). What is the impact of genetic counselling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer? A meta-analytic review. Social Science & Medicine, 54(10), 1463–1470.Google Scholar
  81. Morris, K. T., Johnson, N., Krasikov, N., Allen, M., & Dorsey, P. (2001). Genetic counseling impacts decision for prophylactic surgery for patients perceived to be at high risk for breast cancer. American Journal of Surgery, 181(5), 431–433.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Newman, J. E., Sorenson, J. R., DeVellis, B. M., & Cheuvront, B. (2002). Gender differences in psychosocial reactions to cystic fibrosis carrier testing. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 113(2), 151–157.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Nordin, K., Björk, J., & Berglund, G. (2004). Factors influencing intention to obtain a genetic test for a hereditary disease in an affected group and in the general public. Preventive Medicine, 39, 1107–1114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Parsons, E., & Atkinson, P. (1993). Genetic risk and reproduction. Sociological Review, 41(4), 679–706.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Parsons, E. P., Beale, V., Bennett, H., Jones, J., & Lycett, E. J. (2000). Reassurance through surveillance in the face of clinical uncertainty: The experience of women at risk of familial breast cancer. Health Expectations, 3(4), 263–273.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Parsons, E. P., & Clarke, A. J. (1993). Genetic risk: Women’s understanding of carrier risks in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Journal of Medical Genetics, 30(7), 562–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Parsons, E. P., Clarke, A. J., & Bradley, D. M. (2003). Implications of carrier identification in newborn screening for cystic fibrosis. Archives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & Neonatal Edition, 88(6), F467–F471.Google Scholar
  88. Peshkin, B. N., Schwartz, M. D., Isaacs, C., Hughes, C., Main, D., & Lerman, C. (2002). Utilization of breast cancer screening in a clinically based sample of women after BRCA1/2 testing. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 11(10 Pt 1), 1115–1118.Google Scholar
  89. Pieterse, A. H., Ausems, M. G., Van Dulmen, A. M., Beemer, F. A., & Bensing, J. M. (2005). Initial cancer genetic counseling consultation: Change in counselees’ cognitions and anxiety, and association with addressing their needs and preferences. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 137 A(1), 27–35.Google Scholar
  90. Plon, S. E., Peterson, L. E., Friedman, L. C., & Richards, C. S. (2000). Mammography behavior after receiving a negative BRCA1 mutation test result in the Ashkenazim: A community-based study. Genetics in Medicine, 2(6), 307–311.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385–401.Google Scholar
  92. Resta, R., Bowles Biesecker, B., Bennett, R. L., Blum, S., Estabrooks Hahn, S., & Strecker, M. N., et al. (2006). A new definition of genetic counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors’ Task Force Report. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15(2), 77–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. Reyna, V. F., & Adam, M. B. (2003). Fuzzy-trace theory, risk communication, and product labeling in sexually transmitted diseases. Risk Analysis, 23(2), 325–342.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Roberts, J. S., Cupples, L. A., Relkin, N. R., Whitehouse, P. J., & Green, R. C. (2005). Genetic risk assessment for adult children of people with Alzheimer’s disease: The risk evaluation and education for Alzheimer’s Disease (REVEAL) Study. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 18(4), 250–255.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Robertson, A. (2000). Embodying risk, embodying political rationality: Women’s accounts of risks for breast cancer. Health, Risk & Society, 2(2), 219–235.Google Scholar
  96. Robins Wahlin, T. B., Backman, L., Lundin, A., Haegermark, A., Winblad, B., & Anvret, M. (2000). High suicidal ideation in persons testing for Huntington’s disease. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica, 102(3), 150–161.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Romero, L. J., Garry, P. J., Schuyler, M., Bennahum, D. A., Qualls, C., & Ballinger, L., et al. (2005). Emotional responses to APO E genotype disclosure for Alzheimer disease. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 14(2), 141–150.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. Rothemund, Y., Paepke, S., & Flor, H. (2001). Perception of risk, anxiety, and health behaviors in women at high risk for breast cancer. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 8(3), 230–239.Google Scholar
  99. Royak-Schaler, R., Klabunde, C. N., Greene, W. F., Lannin, D. R., DeVellis, B., & Wilson, K. R., et al. (2002). Communicating breast cancer risk: Patient perceptions of provider discussions. Medscape Womens Health, 7(2), 2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Ryan, E. L., & Skinner, C. S. (1999). Risk beliefs and interest in counseling: Focus-group interviews among first-degree relatives of breast cancer patients. Journal of Cancer Education, 14(2), 99–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Sagi, M., Kaduri, L., Zlotogora, J., & Peretz, T. (1998). The effect of genetic counseling on knowledge and perceptions regarding risks for breast cancer. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 7(5), 417–434.Google Scholar
  102. Scott, S., Prior, L., Wood, F., & Gray, J. (2005). Repositioning the patient: The implications of being ‘at risk’. Social Science & Medicine, 60(8), 1869–1879.Google Scholar
  103. Shaw, C., Abrams, K., & Marteau, T. M. (1999). Psychological impact of predicting individuals’ risks of illness: A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine, 49, 1571–1598.Google Scholar
  104. Sheinfeld Gorin, S., & Albert, S. M. (2003). The meaning of risk to first degree relatives of women with breast cancer. Women & Health, 37(3), 97–114.Google Scholar
  105. Shiloh, S. (2006). Illness representations, self-regulation, and genetic counseling: A theoretical review. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 15(5), 325–337.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  106. Smith, J. A., Michie, S., Stephenson, M., & Quarrell, O. (2002). Risk perception and decision-making processes in candidates for genetic testing for Huntington’s disease: An interpretative phenomenological analysis. Journal of Health Psychology, 7(2), 131–144.Google Scholar
  107. Spielberger, C. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory STAI (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  108. Spielberger, C., Gorsuch, R., & Lushene, R. (1970). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  109. Swerts, A. (1987). Impact of genetic counseling and prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome and neural tube defects. Birth Defects: Original Article Series, 23(2), 61–83.Google Scholar
  110. Van der Ploeg, H., Defares, P., & Spielberger, C. (1980). Handleiding bij de Zelf-Beoordelings Vragenlijst, ZBV [Manual for the Dutch adaptation of the STAI-Y]. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
  111. van Dijk, S., Otten, W., van Asperen, C. J., Timmermans, D. R., Tibben, A., & Zoeteweij, M. W., et al. (2004). Feeling at risk: How women interpret their familial breast cancer risk. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 131(1), 42–49.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  112. van Dijk, S., Otten, W., Zoeteweij, M. W., Timmermans, D. R., van Asperen, C. J., & Breuning, M. H., et al. (2003). Genetic counselling and the intention to undergo prophylactic mastectomy: Effects of a breast cancer risk assessment. British Journal of Cancer, 88(11), 1675–1681.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  113. van Vliet, H. A., Grimes, D. A., Popkin, B., & Smith, U. (2001). Lay persons’ understanding of the risk of Down’s syndrome in genetic counselling. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 108(6), 649–650.Google Scholar
  114. Walter, F. M., & Emery, J. (2006). Perceptions of family history across common diseases: A qualitative study in primary care. Family Practice, 23(4), 472–480.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. Watson, M., Duvivier, V., Wade Walsh, M., Ashley, S., Davidson, J., & Papaikonomou, M., et al. (1998). Family history of breast cancer: What do women understand and recall about their genetic risk? Journal of Medical Genetics, 35(9), 731–738.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. Weinstein, N. D. (1999). What does it mean to understand risk? Evaluating risk comprehension. Journal of the National Cancer Institute Monographs, 25, 15–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  117. Wertz, D. C., Janes, S. R., Rosenfield, J. M., & Erbe, R. W. (1992). Attitudes toward the prenatal diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: Factors in decision making among affected families. American Journal of Human Genetics, 50(5), 1077–1085.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Wilson, B. J., Torrance, N., Mollison, J., Wordsworth, S., Gray, J. R., & Haites, N. E., et al. (2005). Improving the referral process for familial breast cancer genetic counselling: Findings of three randomised controlled trials of two interventions. Health Technology Assessment, 9(3), iii–iv 1–126.Google Scholar
  119. Yesavage, J., Brink, T., Rose, T., Lum, O., Huang, V., & Adey, M., et al. (1983). Development and validation of a geriatric depression screening scale: A preliminary report. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 17(1), 37–49.Google Scholar
  120. Young, D., McLeish, L., Sullivan, F., Pitkethly, M., Reis, M., & Goudie, D., et al. (2006). Familial breast cancer: Management of ‘lower risk’ referrals. British Journal of Cancer, 95, 974–978.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  121. Zigmond, A., & Snaith, R. (1983). The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 67, 361–370.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephanie Sivell
    • 1
  • Glyn Elwyn
    • 1
  • Clara L. Gaff
    • 2
  • Angus J. Clarke
    • 2
  • Rachel Iredale
    • 2
  • Chris Shaw
    • 3
  • Joanna Dundon
    • 4
  • Hazel Thornton
    • 5
  • Adrian Edwards
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Primary Care and Public HealthSchool of Medicine, Cardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  2. 2.Institute of Medical GeneticsSchool of Medicine, Cardiff UniversityCardiffUK
  3. 3.Faculty of Health, Sport and ScienceUniversity of GlamorganPontypriddUK
  4. 4.Gwent Healthcare NHS TrustTorfaenUK
  5. 5.Department of Health SciencesUniversity of LeicesterLeicesterUK

Personalised recommendations