PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10848030

Does knowledge make a difference? The association between knowledge about genes and attitudes toward gene tests.

Abstract

A survey was conducted (n = 1,216) to evaluate the level of knowledge about basic facts of genetics and attitudes toward gene tests among the Finnish population. Our results show that a majority of the Finnish population generally approved of gene tests. Well over half of the respondents believed that genetic testing will have positive consequences, but many also had worries related to the development of gene tests. We showed that there was an association between knowledge and attitudes, but better knowledge did not simply lead to unambiguous acceptance. Among those with the highest level of knowledge there was in many respects both more enthusiasm and more skepticism than among those with the lowest level of knowledge. Those with a low level of knowledge had more difficulties in taking a stance toward attitude statements. In general, steps should be taken, first, to increase citizens' capabilities to seek and understand information about genetics and specific diseases when faced with a need for it. Second, steps should be taken to provide citizens with tools to perceive and discuss potential ethical and social problems, which development of gene technology, genetic testing, and screening bring along. Sites for these enterprises could be the biology school curriculum, genetic counseling, media, as well as health education and health communication in general.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Jallinoja, A R Aro. Does knowledge make a difference? The association between knowledge about genes and attitudes toward gene tests.. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730050019546

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Probability estimation when some observations are grouped.

This paper considers the use of additional questions for decreasing survey non-response rates and an approach for estimating a probability based on the results obtained. In a survey, the respondents are asked to answer an original question and follow-up questions, where the answers for the follow-up questions are grouped answers for the original question. For example, respondents are asked to provide an exact number of incidents, but in cases of 'Do not know' or 'Refuse' responses, they are subsequently asked to pick an answer from a less specific categorical scale. The new estimator obtains smaller variance asymptotically and does not depend on a distribution family. This method is applied to income questions in a survey regarding injury prevention and behaviours. Another application is survey data on intimate partner violence, where some amendments were applied for incorporating post-stratification weights and for using non-random grouping. For additional illustration, an example of parameter estimation on artificially generated data is presented.

Data Collection↗