Abstract
Despite the fact that the internet is a popular source of health information, limited research has been conducted on the ways in which direct-to-consumer (DTC) DNA testing has been discussed by consumers on the internet, and on social media platforms specifically. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of 100 videos that addressed DTC DNA testing on TikTok, a video-sharing social network. The 100 videos included had a combined 77,498 comments and 9,680,309 likes.The majority (> 50%) of videos reviewed mentioned using DTC DNA testing kits to find family roots (94%), included information on commercial DNA testing kits (67%), and featured a person taking or talking about taking a DNA test (92%). These videos also received a majority of the total comments/likes. Neither the use of music (p = .06 and p = .07) nor the mention of using DNA testing to locate family (p = .08 and p = .09) had a significant effect on a video’s comments or likes, respectively. Genetic counselors, health care providers, and public health professionals should be aware that there is a need to present both benefits and disadvantages of DTC DNA testing on social media platforms. A greater presence of comprehensive information on social media platforms can increase the likelihood that one makes erudite decisions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Data availability
Not applicable.
Code availability
Not applicable.
References
Basch CH, Hillyer GC, Wahrman MZ, Garcia P, Basch CE (2020) DNA testing information on YouTube: inadequate advice can mislead and harm the public. J Genet Couns. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1375
Basch CH, Fera J, Pierce I, Basch CE (2021a) Promoting mask use on TikTok: descriptive, cross-sectional study. JMIR Public Health Surveill 7(2):e26392. https://doi.org/10.2196/26392
Basch CH, Meleo-Erwin Z, Fera J, Jaime C, Basch CE (2021) A global pandemic in the time of viral memes: COVID-19 vaccine misinformation and disinformation on TikTok. Hum Vaccin Immunother 1-5.https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2021.1894896
Burroughs AM (2005) The medical examination in United States immigration applications: the potential use of genetic testing leads to heightened privacy concerns. J Biolaw Bus 8(4):22–32
Crawshaw M (2018) Direct-to-consumer DNA testing: the fallout for individuals and their families unexpectedly learning of their donor conception origins. Hum Fertil (Camb) 21(4):225–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/14647273.2017.1339127
Fox S, Duggan M (2013) Pew Research Center. Health online, http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/01/15/health-online-2013/. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
Hogarth S, Javitt G, Melzer D (2008) The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 9(1):161–182
Horton R, Crawford G, Freeman L, Fenwick A, Wright CF, Lucassen A (2019) Direct-to-consumer genetic testing. BMJ 367:l5688. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l5688
Hunt E (2018) Your father’s not your father: when DNA tests reveal more than you bargained for, https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2018/sep/18/your-fathers-not-your-father-when-dna-tests-reveal-more-than-you-bargained-for. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
Karlsson AO, Holmlund G, Egeland T, Mostad P (2007) DNA-testing for immigration cases: the risk of erroneous conclusions. Forensic Sci Int 172(2–3):144–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2006.12.015
Kennett D (2019) Using genetic genealogy databases in missing persons cases and to develop suspect leads in violent crimes. Forensic Sci Int 301:107–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.05.016
Marietta C, McGuire AL (2009) Currents in contemporary ethics Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: is it the practice of medicine? J Law Med Ethics 37(2):369–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2009.00380.x
Pray L (2008) DTC genetic testing: 23 and me DNA Direct and Genelex. Nat Educ 1(1):22
Ram N, Guerrini CJ, McGuire AL (2018) Genealogy databases and the future of criminal investigation. Science 360(6393):1078–1079. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau1083
Resnik DB (2009) Direct-to-consumer genomics, social networking, and confidentiality. Am J Bioeth 9(6–7):45–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160902893924
Sehl K (2020) Everything brands need to know about TikTok in 2020. https://blog.hootsuite.com/what-is-tiktok/
Soo-Jin Lee S, Borgelt E (2014) Protecting posted genes: social net-working and the limits of GINA. Am J Bioeth 14(11):32–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2014.957417
Suter SM (2019) GINA at 10 years: the battle over ‘genetic information’ continues in court. J Law Biosci 5(3):495–526. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsz002
Tandy-Connor S, Guiltinan J, Krempely K, LaDuca H, Reineke P, Gutierrez S, Gray P, Tippin, Davis B (2018) False-positive results released by direct-to-consumer genetic tests highlight the importance of clinical confirmation testing for appropriate patient care (12):1515–152. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2018.38
Transparency Market Research (n.d.) DNA Test Kit Market, https://www.transparencymarketresearch.com/pressrelease/dna-test-kits-market.htm#:~:text=DNA%20Test%20Kits%20Market%20to,by%202030%3A%20Transparency%20Market%20Research&text=According%20to%20the%20report%2C%20the,16%25%20from%202020%20to%202030. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
United States National Library of Medicine (2020) What are the benefits and risks of direct-to-consumer genetic testing? https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/dtcgenetictesting/dtcrisksbenefits. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
Wallroo Media. TikTok statistics (2021) https://wallaroomedia.com/blog/social-media/tiktok-statistics/#:~:text=Total%20App%20Downloads%20%E2%80%93%20The%20TikTok,quarter%20by%20any%20app%2C%20ever. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
Zhang S (2018) When a DNA test shatters your identity, https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/07/dna-test-misattributed-paternity/562928/. Accessed 31 Mar 2021
Norrgard K (2008) DTC genetic testing for diabetes, breast cancer, heart disease and paternity. Nat Educ 1(1):86
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
CB conceptualized the study and NQ collected the data. JF analyzed the data. All contributed to the writing and revision of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
As per the protocol at William Paterson University, the Institutional Review Board does not review studies that do not involve human subjects. This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by the any of the authors.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Basch, C.H., Fera, J. & Quinones, N. A content analysis of direct-to-consumer DNA testing on TikTok. J Community Genet 12, 489–492 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-021-00526-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-021-00526-3