Family Practice Advance Access originally published online on October 7, 2008
Family Practice 2008 25(Supplement 1):i116-i122; doi:10.1093/fampra/cmn067
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appears in the following Family Practice issue: Creating Supportive Environments for Nutrition Guidance: Towards a Synergy Between Primary Care and Public Health. Proceedings of the Fifth Heelsum International Workshop 10-12 December 2007. [View the issue table of contents]
Patients, evidence and genes: an exploration of GPs' perspectives on gene-based personalized nutrition advice
Communication Strategies, Wageningen University, PO Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands
Correspondence to Laura Bouwman, Communication Strategies, Wageningen University, PO Box 8130, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands; Email: laura.bouwman{at}wur.nl
Received 6 June 2008; Revised 28 August 2008; Accepted 29 August 2008.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Background. Nutrigenomics science examines the response of individuals to food compounds using post-genomics technology. It is expected that in the future, personalized nutrition advice can be provided based on information about genetic make-up.
Objectives. Gene-based personalized nutrition advice emerges at the junction of different disciplines and technologies and may directly influence people's lives. Therefore, public concern is to be expected. Because GPs are gatekeepers of health care, their involvement in early stages of the development process is desirable.
Method. In 2006, 15 GPs were interviewed to collect their perceived barriers and opportunities towards involvement in gene-based nutrition advice. The interviews were qualitatively analysed with use of Atlas.ti, a qualitative analysis programme.
Results. The participants held a mostly critical view towards such personalized nutrition advice. They argued that findings of nutritional studies lacked robustness, were not based on patients' needs and were often equivocal. And that a patient central perspective urges them to question consequences for patients. Participants argued that GPs should be involved in selecting and monitoring patients in nutrigenomics studies.
Conclusions. Early involvement of GPs in the development process is needed to allow for the integration of their practical, social and ethical considerations in the technical and scientific agendas. However, the background of their critical attitude towards nutrigenomics-based personalized nutrition, and nutrition advice more generally, has to be explored further. To facilitate a joint learning process and to improve socio-technical decision making with respect to this innovation, initiatives that allow different stakeholders to exchange their perspectives should be organized.
Keywords. Behavioural sciences, genetics, health promotion, nutrition, qualitative research.
Bouwman L, te Molder H and Hiddink G. Patients, evidence and genes. An exploration of GPs' perspectives on gene-based personalized nutrition advice. Family Practice 2008; 25: i116–i122.