Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: A longitudinal cohort study

Saskia C. Sanderson, Michael D. Linderman, Andrew Kasarskis, Ali Bashir, George A. Diaz, Milind C. Mahajan, Hardik Shah, Melissa P. Wasserstein, Randi E. Zinberg, Micol Zweig, Eric E. Schadt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Multiple laboratories now offer clinical whole genome sequencing (WGS). We anticipate WGS becoming routinely used in research and clinical practice. Many institutions are exploring how best to educate geneticists and other professionals about WGS. Providing students in WGS courses with the option to analyze their own genome sequence is one strategy that might enhance students' engagement and motivation to learn about personal genomics. However, if this option is presented to students, it is vital they make informed decisions, do not feel pressured into analyzing their own genomes by their course directors or peers, and feel free to analyze a third-party genome if they prefer. We therefore developed a 26-hour introductory genomics course in part to help students make informed decisions about whether to receive personal WGS data in a subsequent advanced genomics course. In the advanced course, they had the option to receive their own personal genome data, or an anonymous genome, at no financial cost to them. Our primary aims were to examine whether students made informed decisions regarding analyzing their personal genomes, and whether there was evidence that the introductory course enabled the students to make a more informed decision. Methods: This was a longitudinal cohort study in which students (N = 19) completed questionnaires assessing their intentions, informed decision-making, attitudes and knowledge before (T1) and after (T2) the introductory course, and before the advanced course (T3). Informed decision-making was assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale. Results: At the start of the introductory course (T1), most (17/19) students intended to receive their personal WGS data in the subsequent course, but many expressed conflict around this decision. Decisional conflict decreased after the introductory course (T2) indicating there was an increase in informed decision-making, and did not change before the advanced course (T3). This suggests that it was the introductory course content rather than simply time passing that had the effect. In the advanced course, all (19/19) students opted to receive their personal WGS data. No changes in technical knowledge of genomics were observed. Overall attitudes towards WGS were broadly positive. Conclusions: Providing students with intensive introductory education about WGS may help them make informed decisions about whether or not to work with their personal WGS data in an educational setting.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number113
JournalGenome Medicine
Volume5
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 30 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Longitudinal Studies
Decision Making
Cohort Studies
Genome
Students
Genomics
Motivation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Genetics(clinical)
  • Genetics
  • Molecular Biology
  • Molecular Medicine

Cite this

Sanderson, S. C., Linderman, M. D., Kasarskis, A., Bashir, A., Diaz, G. A., Mahajan, M. C., ... Schadt, E. E. (2013). Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: A longitudinal cohort study. Genome Medicine, 5(12), [113]. https://doi.org/10.1186/gm518

Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course : A longitudinal cohort study. / Sanderson, Saskia C.; Linderman, Michael D.; Kasarskis, Andrew; Bashir, Ali; Diaz, George A.; Mahajan, Milind C.; Shah, Hardik; Wasserstein, Melissa P.; Zinberg, Randi E.; Zweig, Micol; Schadt, Eric E.

In: Genome Medicine, Vol. 5, No. 12, 113, 30.12.2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sanderson, SC, Linderman, MD, Kasarskis, A, Bashir, A, Diaz, GA, Mahajan, MC, Shah, H, Wasserstein, MP, Zinberg, RE, Zweig, M & Schadt, EE 2013, 'Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: A longitudinal cohort study', Genome Medicine, vol. 5, no. 12, 113. https://doi.org/10.1186/gm518
Sanderson, Saskia C. ; Linderman, Michael D. ; Kasarskis, Andrew ; Bashir, Ali ; Diaz, George A. ; Mahajan, Milind C. ; Shah, Hardik ; Wasserstein, Melissa P. ; Zinberg, Randi E. ; Zweig, Micol ; Schadt, Eric E. / Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course : A longitudinal cohort study. In: Genome Medicine. 2013 ; Vol. 5, No. 12.
@article{b6a14dfc03614a9e86ace629aa23b305,
title = "Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course: A longitudinal cohort study",
abstract = "Background: Multiple laboratories now offer clinical whole genome sequencing (WGS). We anticipate WGS becoming routinely used in research and clinical practice. Many institutions are exploring how best to educate geneticists and other professionals about WGS. Providing students in WGS courses with the option to analyze their own genome sequence is one strategy that might enhance students' engagement and motivation to learn about personal genomics. However, if this option is presented to students, it is vital they make informed decisions, do not feel pressured into analyzing their own genomes by their course directors or peers, and feel free to analyze a third-party genome if they prefer. We therefore developed a 26-hour introductory genomics course in part to help students make informed decisions about whether to receive personal WGS data in a subsequent advanced genomics course. In the advanced course, they had the option to receive their own personal genome data, or an anonymous genome, at no financial cost to them. Our primary aims were to examine whether students made informed decisions regarding analyzing their personal genomes, and whether there was evidence that the introductory course enabled the students to make a more informed decision. Methods: This was a longitudinal cohort study in which students (N = 19) completed questionnaires assessing their intentions, informed decision-making, attitudes and knowledge before (T1) and after (T2) the introductory course, and before the advanced course (T3). Informed decision-making was assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale. Results: At the start of the introductory course (T1), most (17/19) students intended to receive their personal WGS data in the subsequent course, but many expressed conflict around this decision. Decisional conflict decreased after the introductory course (T2) indicating there was an increase in informed decision-making, and did not change before the advanced course (T3). This suggests that it was the introductory course content rather than simply time passing that had the effect. In the advanced course, all (19/19) students opted to receive their personal WGS data. No changes in technical knowledge of genomics were observed. Overall attitudes towards WGS were broadly positive. Conclusions: Providing students with intensive introductory education about WGS may help them make informed decisions about whether or not to work with their personal WGS data in an educational setting.",
author = "Sanderson, {Saskia C.} and Linderman, {Michael D.} and Andrew Kasarskis and Ali Bashir and Diaz, {George A.} and Mahajan, {Milind C.} and Hardik Shah and Wasserstein, {Melissa P.} and Zinberg, {Randi E.} and Micol Zweig and Schadt, {Eric E.}",
year = "2013",
month = "12",
day = "30",
doi = "10.1186/gm518",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "5",
journal = "Genome Medicine",
issn = "1756-994X",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Informed decision-making among students analyzing their personal genomes on a whole genome sequencing course

T2 - A longitudinal cohort study

AU - Sanderson, Saskia C.

AU - Linderman, Michael D.

AU - Kasarskis, Andrew

AU - Bashir, Ali

AU - Diaz, George A.

AU - Mahajan, Milind C.

AU - Shah, Hardik

AU - Wasserstein, Melissa P.

AU - Zinberg, Randi E.

AU - Zweig, Micol

AU - Schadt, Eric E.

PY - 2013/12/30

Y1 - 2013/12/30

N2 - Background: Multiple laboratories now offer clinical whole genome sequencing (WGS). We anticipate WGS becoming routinely used in research and clinical practice. Many institutions are exploring how best to educate geneticists and other professionals about WGS. Providing students in WGS courses with the option to analyze their own genome sequence is one strategy that might enhance students' engagement and motivation to learn about personal genomics. However, if this option is presented to students, it is vital they make informed decisions, do not feel pressured into analyzing their own genomes by their course directors or peers, and feel free to analyze a third-party genome if they prefer. We therefore developed a 26-hour introductory genomics course in part to help students make informed decisions about whether to receive personal WGS data in a subsequent advanced genomics course. In the advanced course, they had the option to receive their own personal genome data, or an anonymous genome, at no financial cost to them. Our primary aims were to examine whether students made informed decisions regarding analyzing their personal genomes, and whether there was evidence that the introductory course enabled the students to make a more informed decision. Methods: This was a longitudinal cohort study in which students (N = 19) completed questionnaires assessing their intentions, informed decision-making, attitudes and knowledge before (T1) and after (T2) the introductory course, and before the advanced course (T3). Informed decision-making was assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale. Results: At the start of the introductory course (T1), most (17/19) students intended to receive their personal WGS data in the subsequent course, but many expressed conflict around this decision. Decisional conflict decreased after the introductory course (T2) indicating there was an increase in informed decision-making, and did not change before the advanced course (T3). This suggests that it was the introductory course content rather than simply time passing that had the effect. In the advanced course, all (19/19) students opted to receive their personal WGS data. No changes in technical knowledge of genomics were observed. Overall attitudes towards WGS were broadly positive. Conclusions: Providing students with intensive introductory education about WGS may help them make informed decisions about whether or not to work with their personal WGS data in an educational setting.

AB - Background: Multiple laboratories now offer clinical whole genome sequencing (WGS). We anticipate WGS becoming routinely used in research and clinical practice. Many institutions are exploring how best to educate geneticists and other professionals about WGS. Providing students in WGS courses with the option to analyze their own genome sequence is one strategy that might enhance students' engagement and motivation to learn about personal genomics. However, if this option is presented to students, it is vital they make informed decisions, do not feel pressured into analyzing their own genomes by their course directors or peers, and feel free to analyze a third-party genome if they prefer. We therefore developed a 26-hour introductory genomics course in part to help students make informed decisions about whether to receive personal WGS data in a subsequent advanced genomics course. In the advanced course, they had the option to receive their own personal genome data, or an anonymous genome, at no financial cost to them. Our primary aims were to examine whether students made informed decisions regarding analyzing their personal genomes, and whether there was evidence that the introductory course enabled the students to make a more informed decision. Methods: This was a longitudinal cohort study in which students (N = 19) completed questionnaires assessing their intentions, informed decision-making, attitudes and knowledge before (T1) and after (T2) the introductory course, and before the advanced course (T3). Informed decision-making was assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale. Results: At the start of the introductory course (T1), most (17/19) students intended to receive their personal WGS data in the subsequent course, but many expressed conflict around this decision. Decisional conflict decreased after the introductory course (T2) indicating there was an increase in informed decision-making, and did not change before the advanced course (T3). This suggests that it was the introductory course content rather than simply time passing that had the effect. In the advanced course, all (19/19) students opted to receive their personal WGS data. No changes in technical knowledge of genomics were observed. Overall attitudes towards WGS were broadly positive. Conclusions: Providing students with intensive introductory education about WGS may help them make informed decisions about whether or not to work with their personal WGS data in an educational setting.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84891359657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84891359657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/gm518

DO - 10.1186/gm518

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84891359657

VL - 5

JO - Genome Medicine

JF - Genome Medicine

SN - 1756-994X

IS - 12

M1 - 113

ER -