Abstract

BackgroundBiomarker research is gaining increasing attention focusing on the preclinical stages of the disease. Such interest requires special attention for communication and disclosure in clinical contexts. Many countries give dementia a high health policy priority by developing national strategies and by improving guidelines addressing disclosure of a diagnosis; however, risk communication is often neglected.Main textThis paper aims to identify the challenges of disclosure in the context of dementia prediction and to find out whether existing clinical guidelines sufficiently address the issues of disclosing a dementia diagnosis and of disclosing the risk of developing dementia in asymptomatic and MCI stage. We will examine clinical guidelines and recommendations of three countries (USA, Canada and Germany) regarding predictive testing and diagnostic disclosure in dementia and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) to show their potentials and limits. This will provide a background to address ethical implications of predictive information and to identify ways how to proceed further. We will start by examining the guidelines and recommendations by focusing on what there is already and what is missing regarding the challenges of disclosing dementia prediction and MCI. Then, we will highlight the novel ethical issues generated by the shift to identify preclinical stages of the disease by biomarkers. We will argue for the need to develop guidelines for disclosing a risk status, which requires different considerations then disclosing a diagnosis of dementia. Finally, we will make some suggestions on how to address the gap and challenges raised by referring to German Stakeholder Conference, which presents us a good starting point to the applicability of involving stakeholders.ConclusionsThis paper underlines the need to develop empirically based guidelines that address the ethical and social strategies for risk communication of dementia prediction by genetic as well as non-genetic biomarkers. According to our analysis, the guidelines do not address the new developments sufficiently. International efforts should aim for specific guidelines on counseling, communicating risk and disclosing results. We argue that guidelines on (risk) disclosure should be developed by involving various stakeholders and should be informed by socio-empirical studies involving laypersons’ needs and wishes regarding risk communication.

Highlights

  • This paper aims to identify the challenges of disclosure in the context of dementia prediction and to find out whether existing clinical guidelines sufficiently address the issues of disclosing a dementia diagnosis and of disclosing the risk of developing dementia in asymptomatic and Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) stage

  • Recommendations on predictive testing to determine the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease (AD) Biomarkers are not yet recommended for clinical diagnosis; practitioners can direct the persons with MCI to research centers [11]

  • A recent study held in Germany showed that there is a great heterogeneity among practitioners in interpretation, application and disclosure of biomarkers to tested persons [29]

Read more

Summary

Main text

An overview of current policies from USA, Canada and Germany regarding disclosure practice: what is there? In May 2017, the 17th World Health Assembly endorsed the global dementia action plan [7]. Recommendations on predictive testing to determine the risk of developing AD Biomarkers are not yet recommended for clinical diagnosis; practitioners can direct the persons with MCI to research centers [11]. An analysis In the following part, we discuss three main foci respectively: a) What can we learn from the existing policy strategies (such as guidelines, NDP or stakeholder discourse) regarding the challenges of disclosing dementia prediction and MCI?. A recent study held in Germany showed that there is a great heterogeneity among practitioners in interpretation, application and disclosure of biomarkers to tested persons [29] This is because standards for disclosing a very early diagnosis of AD or a diagnosis of MCI or even risk information is lacking. Whereas a diagnostic test informs and confirms the person having signs and symptoms of a disease, predictive genetic test informs the asymptomatic person about the likelihood of

Conclusions
Background
Disclosure of Dementia Diagnosis
Disclosure of MCI Guidelines Diagnosis
Limitations
10. Gerontological Society of America
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.