Effects of health literacy skills, educational attainment, and level of melanoma risk on responses to personalized genomic testing.

The sample came from one geographic region and almost all participants preferred English, so results may not apply to Spanish-speaking patients. The analysis included only participants who chose testing, returned a kit, and completed the two-week survey, so it may miss people who did not test or did not respond. Participants had fairly high health literacy on average, so responses among people with inadequate health literacy may differ. Health literacy was measured by three self-report items, not a broader assessment of reading, numeracy, or comprehension demands. Responses were measured only two weeks after mailed feedback, so long-term understanding, distress, or behavior change was not shown. This secondary analysis did not compare intervention participants with wait-list controls, so it cannot show the effect of receiving feedback. The adjusted models included both health literacy and education, which may overadjust because health literacy may lie in the causal pathway between education and outcomes.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The supplied publication types indicate NIH extramural and non-U.S. government research support, but the article text does not name a funder.

Do not conclude that plain-language melanoma genetic feedback was proven to improve patient outcomes or sun protection behavior. This analysis surveyed only participants who chose testing and returned a kit, mostly had high health literacy, and measured responses two weeks after feedback.