Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Springer (part of Springer Nature), Journal of Genetic Counseling, 2(24), p. 259-266

DOI: 10.1007/s10897-014-9758-8

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Evaluation of Patient Education Materials: The Example of Circulating cell free DNA Testing for Aneuploidy

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Informed consent is the process by which the treating health care provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient may make a voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment. When the analysis of circulating cell free DNA (ccfDNA) became commercially available in 2011 through the Prenatal Diagnostic Laboratory at Women & Infants Hospital of Providence, Rhode Island to "high-risk" women, it provided an opportunity to examine how commercial laboratories informed potential consumers. We identified, via an internet search, four laboratories offering such testing in the United States and one in Europe. We evaluated patient educational materials (PEMs) from each using the Flesch Reading Ease method and a modified version of the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) criteria. Pamphlets were also reviewed for their inclusion of content recommendations from the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis, the National Society of Genetic Counselors, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists jointly with the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine, and the American College of Genetics and Genomics. Reading levels were typically high (10th-12th grade). None of the pamphlets met all SAM criteria evaluated nor did any pamphlet include all recommended content items. To comply with readability and content recommendations more closely, Women & Infants Hospital created a new pamphlet to which it applied the same criteria, and also subjected it to focus group assessment. These types of analyses can serve as a model for future evaluations of similar patient educational materials.