Conceptions on genetics in a group of college students

dc.creatorCorreia, Patrícia Santana
dc.creatorVitiello, Pedro
dc.creatorCardoso, Maria Helena Cabral de Almeida
dc.creatorHorovitz, Dafne Dain Gandelman
dc.date2013-01-22T18:24:08Z
dc.date2013-01-22T18:24:08Z
dc.date2013
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-26T20:33:46Z
dc.date.available2023-09-26T20:33:46Z
dc.identifierCORREIA, Patricia Santana et al. Conceptions on genetics in a group of college students. J Community Genet, [S.l.], v. 4, n. 1, p. 115-123, jan. 2013.
dc.identifierhttps://www.arca.fiocruz.br/handle/icict/6229
dc.identifier10.1007/s12687-012-0125-x
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/8859583
dc.descriptionThe purpose of this study was to investigate awareness, beliefs, and opinions on genetics in a group of Brazilian college students from several courses. The study used the focus group technique with the participation of 19 students, divided into four groups. Also, it used the isotopic reading technique to analyze the material. The results were divided in four themes: the basic knowledge of genetics, the “new genetics,” including molecular biology and testing, genetic manipulation, and genetics and the media. The participants showed reasonable knowledge on the subject, obtained from various sources, including the printed press, the internet, documentaries, and fictional TV shows. Ethical issues were discussed comprehensively and the groups showed awareness on the hazards brought by genetic reductionism and the need to have some type of regulation regarding genetic manipulation and testing. It is necessary to broaden the debate about the progress in genetics because some of them will affect a significant number of people. This debate should include the lay public, which has been actively participating in decisions involving research and the use of new technologies.
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.languagepor
dc.publisherSpringer
dc.relationAsai A, Ohnishi M, Nishigaki E, Sekimoto M, Fukuhara S, Fukui T (2004) Focus group interviews examining attitudes toward medical research among the Japanese: a qualitative study. Bioethics 18:448–470.
dc.relationBates B (2005) Public culture and public understanding of genetics: a focus group study. Public Understand Sci 14:47–65.
dc.relationBotkin J, Smith K, Croyle R, Baty B, Wylie J, Dutson D et al (2003) Genetic testing for a BRCA1 mutation: prophylactic surgery and screening behavior in women 2 years post testing. Am J Med Genet 118A:201–209.
dc.relationBowen D, Batuello K, Raats M (2005) Marketing genetic tests: empowerment or snake oil? Health Educ Behav 32:676–685.
dc.relationBrasil, Ministério da Saúde (2009) Brasil livre da rubéola: campanha nacional de vacinação para eliminação da rubéola [Brazil free from rubella: nacional vaccination campaign for rubella elimination], Brasil, 2008–Brasília: Ministério da Saúde. http://www.saude. gov.br/bvs. Accessed 13 Mar 2012.
dc.relationBrent RL (1986) The effects of embryonic and fetal exposure to X-ray, microwaves, and ultrasound. ClinPerinatol 13:615–648.
dc.relationCardoso C (1997) Narrativa, Sentido, História (Narrative, Sense, History). Papirus, Campinas.
dc.relationCastro M, Cunha C, Moreira P, Fernández R, Garcias G, Martino-Röth M (2006) Frequência das malformações múltiplas em recémnascidos na Cidade de Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil, e fatores sócio-demográficos associados. [Frequency of multiple malformations in newborns in the city of Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, and associated socio-demographic factors]. Cad Saúde Pública 22:1009–1015.
dc.relationCDC. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2012). Public health genomics. Available at www.cdc.gov/genomics/gtesting/index.htm. Accessed 2 Aug 2012.
dc.relationCondit C (1999) The meaning of the gene: public debates about human heredity. University of Wisconsin Press, Wiscosin.
dc.relationCondit C, Condit D (2001) Blueprints and recipes: gendered metaphors for genetic medicine. J Med Humanit 22:29–39.
dc.relationCwikel J (1997) Comments on the psychosocial aspects of the international conference on radiation and health. Environ Health Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1607–1608.
dc.relationDastgiri S, Stone D, Le-Ha C, Gilmour W (2002) Prevalence and secular trend of congenital anomalies in Glasgow, UK. Arch Dis Child 86:257–263
dc.relationDelatycki M, Allen K, Nisselle A, Collins V, Metcalfe S, duSart D et al (2005) Use of community genetic screening to prevent HFEassociated hereditary haemochromatosis. Lancet 366:314–316.
dc.relationDuden B, Samerski S (2007) Pop genes: an investigation of the gene in popular parlance. In: Burri R, Dumit J (eds) Biomedicine as culture. Instrumental practices, technoscientific knowledge, and new modes of life. Routledge, New York, pp 167–189.
dc.relationDuncan R, Reiser B (2007) Reasoning across ontologically distinct levels: students’ understandings of molecular genetics. J Res Sci Teach 44:938–959.
dc.relationGarcias G, Schüler-Faccini L (2004) The beliefs of mothers in southern Brazil regarding risk-factors associated with congenital abnormalities. Genet Mol Biol 27:147–153.
dc.relationGibbs A (1997) Focus Groups. Social Research Update 19, available at http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU19.html. Accessed 11 Nov 2010.
dc.relationGreen R, Roberts J, Cupples L, Relkin N, Whitehouse P, Brown T et al (2009) Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer’s disease. N Engl J Med 361:245–254.
dc.relationGreimas AJ (1987) On meaning: selected writings in semiotic theory. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
dc.relationHerrera J, Aravena T, Cifuentes L (2001) Malformaciones congénitas en Chile: un problema emergente período 1995–1999 [Congenital malformations in Chile: an emerging problem in period 1995– 1999]. Verméd Chile 29:895–904.
dc.relationHorovitz D, Ferraz V, Dain S, Marques-de-Faria A (2012) Genetic services and testing in Brazil. J Community Genet. doi:10.1007/ s12687-012-0096-y.
dc.relationIngram-Waters M (2009) Public fiction as knowledge production the case of the Raelians’ cloning. Public Understand Sci 18:292–308.
dc.relationKerr A, Cunninghan-Burley S, Amos A (1998) Drawing the line: an analysis of lay people’s discussions about the new genetics. Public Understand Sci 7:113–133.
dc.relationKhoury M, Bowen M, Burke W, Coates R, Dowling N, Evans J (2011) Current priorities for public health practice in addressing the role of human genomics in improving population health. Am J Prev Med 40:486–493.
dc.relationKrueger R (2004) Focus groups: a practical guide for applied research. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
dc.relationLanie A, Jayaratne T, Sheldon J, Kardia S, Anderson E, Feldbaum M et al (2004) Exploring the public understanding of basic genetic concepts. J Genet Couns 13:305–320.
dc.relationLippa R (2002) Gender, nature, and nurture. Erlbaum, Mawah.
dc.relationLuhmann N (2000) The reality of the mass media. Standford University Press, Standford.
dc.relationMarteau T, Lerman C (2001) Genetic risk and behavioural change. BMJ 322:1056–1059.
dc.relationMassarani L, Moreira I (2005) Attitudes towards genetics: a case study among Brazilian high school students. Public Understand Sci 14:201–212.
dc.relationMeisenberg G (2009) Designer babies on tap? Medical students’ attitudes to pre-implantation genetic screening. Public Understand Sci 18:149–166.
dc.relationMezzomo C, Garcias G, SclowitzM, Brum C, Fontana Tet al (2007) Uso de folato na gestação e fatores associados. [Use of folate in pregnancy and associated factors]. Cad Saúde Pública 23:2716–2726.
dc.relationMiranda A (2003) A Prática Pedagógica do Professor de Alunos com Deficiência Mental [The pedagogic practice of the teacher of mentally deficient students] [thesis] Piracicaba, Unimep.
dc.relationNelkin D, Lindee S (1995) The DNA mystique: the gene as a cultural icon. Freeman, New York.
dc.relationPetersen A, Bunton R (2002) The new genetics and the public’s health. Routledge, New York.
dc.relationRose N (2006) The politics of life itself: biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
dc.relationRovira S (2008) Metaphors of DNA: a review of the popularization. J Sci Comm 7:1–8.
dc.relationSchäfer M (2009) From public understanding to public engagement: an empirical assessment of changes in science. Coverage Sci Comm 30:475–505.
dc.relationVecina Neto G (2002) Resolução RDC nº. 344, de 13 de dezembro de 2002. http://www.anvisa.gov.br/legis/resol/index_2002_rdc.htm. Accessed 13 Mar 2012.
dc.relationVenville G, Treagust D (1998) Exploring conceptual change in genetics using a multidimensional interpretive framework. J Res Sci Teach 35:1031–1055.
dc.relationWang C, Bowen D, Kardia S (2005) Research and practice opportunities at the intersection of health education, health behavior, and genomics. Health Educ Behav 32:686–701.
dc.relationWeiner K (2009) The tenacity of the coronary candidate: how people with familial hypercholesterolaemia construct raised cholesterol and coronary heart disease. Health 13:407–427.
dc.rightsrestricted access
dc.subjectGenetics
dc.subjectPublic Opinion
dc.subjectEducation
dc.subjectFocus Groups
dc.subjectGenética
dc.subjectOpinião Pública
dc.subjectEducação
dc.subjectGrupos Focais
dc.titleConceptions on genetics in a group of college students
dc.typeArticle


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución