Europe PMC

This website requires cookies, and the limited processing of your personal data in order to function. By using the site you are agreeing to this as outlined in our privacy notice and cookie policy.

The future in clinical genetics: affective forecasting biases in patient and clinician decision making.

Author information

Affiliations

  • 1. Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.
      Authors
    • Peters SA 1
    (1 author)

ORCIDs linked to this article

Clinical Genetics, 11 Sep 2013, 85(4):312-317
https://doi.org/10.1111/cge.12255 PMID: 23952534 

Review

Abstract 

When clinicians facilitate and patients make decisions about predictive genetic testing, they often base their choices on the predicted emotional consequences of positive and negative test results. Research from psychology and decision making suggests that such predictions may often be biased. Work on affective forecasting-predicting one's future emotional states-shows that people tend to overestimate the impact of (especially negative) emotional events on their well-being; a phenomenon termed the impact bias. In this article, we review the causes and consequences of the impact bias in medical decision making, with a focus on applying such findings to predictive testing in clinical genetics. We also recommend strategies for reducing the impact bias and consider the ethical and practical implications of doing so.

Full text links 

Read article at publisher's site: https://doi.org/10.1111/cge.12255

References 

Articles referenced by this article (86)

Show 10 more references (10 of 86)

Citations & impact 

Impact metrics

23
Citations
Jump to Citations

Citations of article over time

Alternative metrics

Altmetric item for https://www.altmetric.com/details/1703164
Altmetric
Discover the attention surrounding your research
https://www.altmetric.com/details/1703164

Smart citations by scite.ai
Smart citations by scite.ai include citation statements extracted from the full text of the citing article. The number of the statements may be higher than the number of citations provided by EuropePMC if one paper cites another multiple times or lower if scite has not yet processed some of the citing articles.
Explore citation contexts and check if this article has been supported or disputed.
https://scite.ai/reports/10.1111/cge.12255

Supporting
Mentioning
Contrasting
0
32
0

Article citations

Go to all (23) article citations

Similar Articles 

To arrive at the top five similar articles we use a word-weighted algorithm to compare words from the Title and Abstract of each citation.