» Articles » PMID: 11426902

Lay Persons' Understanding of the Risk of Down's Syndrome in Genetic Counselling

Overview
Journal BJOG
Date 2001 Jun 28
PMID 11426902
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Genetic counselling traditionally expresses risk in proportions (e.g. 1 in 112) rather than as rates (e.g., 8.9 per 1,000). The justification for this practice is unclear. To assess the understanding of lay persons of the risk of Down's Syndrome, whether expressed as rates or as proportions, we analysed 589 self-administered questionnaires. Overall, respondents understood rates significantly better than proportions (76.2% vs 72.3% correct, respectively; P = 0.03) Evidence from two studies in disparate populations suggests that rates are better understood and thus are the preferred way to explain genetic risk to lay persons.

Citing Articles

Scope, Methods, and Overview Findings for the Making Numbers Meaningful Evidence Review of Communicating Probabilities in Health: A Systematic Review.

Ancker J, Benda N, Sharma M, Johnson S, Demetres M, Delgado D MDM Policy Pract. 2025; 10(1):23814683241255334.

PMID: 39995784 PMC: 11848889. DOI: 10.1177/23814683241255334.


How Point (Single-Probability) Tasks Are Affected by Probability Format, Part 1: A Making Numbers Meaningful Systematic Review.

Ancker J, Benda N, Sharma M, Johnson S, Demetres M, Delgado D MDM Policy Pract. 2025; 10(1):23814683241255333.

PMID: 39995779 PMC: 11848880. DOI: 10.1177/23814683241255333.


Designing Support to help Health Communication Professionals Convey Numbers Clearly to the Public - A Needs Assessment and Formative Usability Evaluation.

Suresh U, Ancker J, Zikmund-Fisher B, Benda N AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2024; 2023:1277-1286.

PMID: 38222428 PMC: 10785911.


Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetes.

Haga S, Barry W, Mills R, Svetkey L, Suchindran S, Willard H Public Health Genomics. 2014; 17(2):95-104.

PMID: 24577154 PMC: 4028057. DOI: 10.1159/000358413.


How risk is perceived, constructed and interpreted by clients in clinical genetics, and the effects on decision making: systematic review.

Sivell S, Elwyn G, Gaff C, Clarke A, Iredale R, Shaw C J Genet Couns. 2007; 17(1):30-63.

PMID: 17968638 DOI: 10.1007/s10897-007-9132-1.