2006, 2005; Henriksson and Kristoffersson 2006; Julian-Reynier and Arnaud 2006; Plass et al. 2006; Schmidtke selleck compound et al. 2006). As part of a

larger study in five European countries, we examined the self-reported behaviours and educational priorities of primary care providers in situations where genetics was relevant. This paper will present the results relating to perceptions of professional responsibility for genetic care amongst general practitioners, using hereditary cardiac disease as an example of the “new” genetics in common diseases. We aimed to analyse these attitudes and their determining factors. Methods Sampling As part of the larger GenEd (Genetic Education for Nongenetic Health Professionals) study into educational priorities in genetics for primary care providers, general practitioners in France, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden and UK were sent a self-administered questionnaire in early 2005. The

sample size was calculated based on a 10% precision (95% CI) for an educational outcome measure (Calefato et al. 2008). Germany used a deliberate over-sampling strategy because of the anticipated low response rate. In France and UK, a random sample of a representative database was taken, in Germany a random sample of MDs receiving reimbursement from sickness funds and training MD students was taken, in the Netherlands sampling was undertaken by the Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research excluding those who had recently participated in research many and Sweden all general practitioners were approached. Non-responders were sent at least one reminder ACP-196 order letter and, in some countries, were telephoned. Questionnaire The questionnaire find more was developed by a multidisciplinary group including geneticists, primary care providers and statisticians, initially in English. It was piloted in English in each participating country, then translated and back-translated to ensure consistency. Translated questionnaires were then re-piloted. As well as demographics, the questionnaire

included a hypothetical scenario relating to sudden cardiac death, a diagnosis chosen because of the increasing recognition of genetic factors in its aetiology (as demonstrated by its inclusion in the 2005 revision of the UK National Service Framework for Heart Disease (Department of Health 2005)), but where “traditional” genetic teaching is unlikely to have featured. The text is shown in the text box. The vignette may have provided new information to some respondents. We wished to standardise their knowledge in order to interpret their subsequent practice intentions, as we intended the survey to be a pragmatic study of usual practice rather than a specific test of knowledge of HOCM. Box: text of the questionnaire scenario Mr Smith (aged 35) attends your surgery because his 27-year-old brother, a competitive swimmer, has just died suddenly. He collapsed in the pool and despite defibrillation was found to be dead.