Decision-making about genetic health information among family dyads: a systematic literature review. Issue 3 (3rd July 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Law, Wai Ki; Yaremych, Haley E.; Ferrer, Rebecca A.; Richardson, Ebony; Wu, Yelena P.; Turbitt, Erin
• Is Part Of: Health psychology review. Volume 16:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 412
• Page End: 429
• Publication Date: 2022-07-03
• Subjects: Dyad -- decision-making -- genetic testing -- family communication -- APIM -- non-independence; Clinical health psychology -- Periodicals; 613.019
• DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2021.1980083
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1743-7199

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Decisions involving two individuals (i.e., dyadic decision-making) have been increasingly studied in healthcare research. There is evidence of bi-directional influences in decision-making processes among spousal, provider-patient and parent–child dyads. Genetic information can directly impact biologically related individuals. Thus, it is important to understand dyadic decision-making about genetic health information among family members. This systematic literature review aimed to identify literature examining decision-making among family dyads. Peer-reviewed publications were included if they reported quantitative empirical research on dyadic decision-making about genetic information, published between January 1998 and August 2020 and written in English. The search was conducted in 6 databases and returned 3167 articles, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were in the context of cancer genetic testing ( n = 8) or reproductive testing or screening ( n = 5). Studies reported two broad categories of decisions with dyadic influence: undergoing screening or testing ( n = 10) and sharing information with family ( n = 5). Factors were correlated between dyads such as attitudes, knowledge, behaviors and psychological wellbeing. Emerging evidence shows that dyad members influence each other when making decisions about receiving or sharing genetic information. Our findings emphasize the importance of considering both members of a dyad in intervention design and clinical interactions.