Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIRx Med

Date Submitted: Apr 17, 2021
Date Accepted: Jan 29, 2022
Date Submitted to PubMed: Sep 19, 2023

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Patient Recommendations for the Content and Design of Electronic Returns of Genetic Test Results: Interview Study Among Patients Who Accessed Their Genetic Test Results via the Internet

Korngiebel DM, West KM

Patient Recommendations for the Content and Design of Electronic Returns of Genetic Test Results: Interview Study Among Patients Who Accessed Their Genetic Test Results via the Internet

JMIRx Med 2022;3(2):e29706

DOI: 10.2196/29706

PMID: 37725563

PMCID: 10414314

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Patient recommendations for content and design for electronic return of genetic test results: An interview study among patients who accessed their genetic test results online

  • Diane M Korngiebel; 
  • Kathleen McGlone West

ABSTRACT

Background:

Genetic test results will be increasingly made available electronically as more patient-facing tools are developed; however, little research has been done that collects patient preferences for content and design before creating results templates.

Objective:

This study identifies patient preferences for electronic return of genetic test results, including what considerations should be prioritized for content and design.

Methods:

Following User-Centered Design methods, 59 interviews were conducted using semi-structured protocols. The interviews explored content and design issues for patient portal results return for patients who received electronic results for specific types of genetic tests (pharmacogenomic, hereditary blood disorders, and positive and negative risk results for heritable cancers) or who had electronically received any type of genetic test result as well as a non-genetic test result.

Results:

In general, a majority of participants felt that there always needed to be some clinician involvement in electronic results return and that electronic coversheets with simple summaries would be helpful for facilitating that. Coversheet summaries could accompany, but not replace, the more detailed report. Participants had specific suggestions for those results summaries, such as only reporting the information that was most important for patients to understand, including next steps, and to do so using clear language free of medical jargon. Electronic results return should also include explicit encouragement for patients to contact providers with questions. Finally, many participants preferred to manage their care using their smartphones, particularly in instances where they needed to access health information on the go.

Conclusions:

Participants recommended that a patient-friendly front section accompany the more detailed report and made suggestions for organization, content, and wording. Many used their smartphones regularly to access test results, therefore, health systems and patient portal software vendors should accommodate smartphone application design and web portal design concomitantly when developing results return platforms. Clinical Trial: N/A


 Citation

Please cite as:

Korngiebel DM, West KM

Patient Recommendations for the Content and Design of Electronic Returns of Genetic Test Results: Interview Study Among Patients Who Accessed Their Genetic Test Results via the Internet

JMIRx Med 2022;3(2):e29706

DOI: 10.2196/29706

PMID: 37725563

PMCID: 10414314

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.