Development and evaluation of a novel educational program for providers on the use of polygenic risk scores

This study aimed to develop an online educational program for using polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast and ovarian cancer risk assessments and to evaluate the impact on the attitudes, confidence, knowledge, and preparedness of genetic health care providers (GHPs). The educational program comprise...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Genetics in medicine 2023-08, Vol.25 (8), p.100876-100876, Article 100876
Hauptverfasser: Yanes, Tatiane, Wallingford, Courtney K., Young, Mary-Anne, McInerney-Leo, Aideen M., Willis, Amanda M., McKnight, Lauren, Terrill, Bronwyn, McInerny, Simone, Forrest, Laura E., Cicciarelli, Linda, Williams, Rachel, Keane, Holly, James, Paul A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:This study aimed to develop an online educational program for using polygenic risk score (PRS) for breast and ovarian cancer risk assessments and to evaluate the impact on the attitudes, confidence, knowledge, and preparedness of genetic health care providers (GHPs). The educational program comprises an online module that covers the theoretical aspects of PRS and a facilitated virtual workshop with prerecorded role-plays and case discussions. Data were collected in pre- and posteducation surveys. Eligible participants were GHPs working in Australian familial cancer clinics registered to recruit patients for a breast and ovarian cancer PRS clinical trial (n = 12). A total of 124 GHPs completed the PRS education, of whom 80 (64%) and 67 (41%) completed the pre- and posteducation surveys, respectively. Before education, GHPs reported limited experience, confidence, and preparedness using PRS, but they recognized its potential benefits. After education, GHPs indicated improved attitudes (P ≤ .001), confidence (P ≤ .001), knowledge (P ≤ .001), and preparedness (P ≤ .001) to use PRS. Most GHPs thought that the program entirely met their learning needs (73%) and was completely relevant to their clinical practice (88%). GHPs identified PRS implementation barriers, including limited funding models, diversity issues, and need for clinical guidelines. Our education program improved GHP attitudes, confidence, knowledge, and preparedness for using PRS/personalized risk and provides a framework for the development of future programs.
ISSN:1098-3600
1530-0366
DOI:10.1016/j.gim.2023.100876