Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Direct to consumer genetic testing in Denmark-public knowledge, use, and attitudes

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Crosstalk between BH4, pain, and dystonia

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearchpeer-review

  2. The genetic structure of Norway

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Clinical utility gene card for oculocutaneous (OCA) and ocular albinism (OA)-an update

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Atrial fibrillation-a complex polygenetic disease

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  5. Genetic study of the Arctic CPT1A variant suggests that its effect on fatty acid levels is modulated by traditional Inuit diet

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  1. Genetic disease is a common cause of bilateral childhood cataract in Denmark

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Causes of poor eye contact in infants: a population-based study.

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Selection criteria for assembling a pediatric cancer predisposition syndrome gene panel

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

Direct to consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is offered by commercial companies, but the use in the general population has only been sparsely investigated. A questionnaire was sent to 2013 representative Danish citizens asking about their awareness and use of DTC-GT. Individuals who had undergone a genetic test were interviewed to determine if the results had been understood correctly. A pilot study with 2469 questionnaires was performed before this study. In total, 45.4% of the individuals (n = 913/2013) had knowledge about DTC-GT and 2.5% (n = (18 + 5)/913) previously had a genetic test by a private company and 5.8% through the public health care system (n = (48 + 5)/913). Curiosity about own genetic information was the most frequent motivation (40.9%, n = 9/22) as well as knowledge of ancestry (36.4%, n = 8/22) and advice about lifestyle, exercise, or diet (36.4%, n = 8/22). Test of own disease risk was given as a reason in 27.3% (n = 6/22) and seeking possible explanation of specific symptoms in 13.6% (n = 3/22). 50% (n = 11/22) answered that they had become concerned after the test, and 17.4% (n = 4/23) had consulted their GP. Interviews in a subset of respondents from the pilot study revealed problems with understanding the results. One problem was how to interpret the genetic test results with respect to individual risk for a disease. For example, the difference between disease causing genetic variants in monogenetic diseases versus statistical risks by SNPs in multifactorial diseases was not understood by the respondents.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG
Volume29
Issue number5
Pages (from-to)851-860
ISSN1018-4813
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2021

ID: 65147529