Bio

Bio


Prior to joining Stanford University, MaryAnn was the founding director of the Master’s Program in Genetic Counseling and Assistant Dean in the Division of Graduate Medical Sciences at Boston University School of Medicine. Her clinical career has focused on prenatal genetic counseling, serving in that capacity for three years with the Greenwood Genetic Center and 12 years at Boston Medical Center. She has served on national committees for the American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC), the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling (ACGC), and the Association of Genetic Counseling Program Directors (AGCPD), and the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC).

Academic Appointments


Administrative Appointments


  • Co-Director, MS Program in Human Genetics and Genetic Counseling, Stanford University School of Medicine (2016 - Present)
  • Consultant on Genetic Counseling Professional Practice, Stanford Children's Health | Lucile Packard Children's Hospital (2016 - Present)

Boards, Advisory Committees, Professional Organizations


  • Board of Directors (Director at Large), National Society of Genetic Counselors (2016 - Present)

Professional Education


  • EdD, Boston University, Educational Leadership and Policy (2015)
  • MS, University of South Carolina, Genetic Counseling (2000)
  • BS, Furman University, Psychology (1998)

Research & Scholarship

Current Research and Scholarly Interests


My research has focused on faculty development in academic medicine and the translation of genomics into public health.

Teaching

2017-18 Courses


Publications

All Publications


  • Mid-career faculty development in academic medicine: How does it impact faculty and institutional vitality? The journal of faculty development Campion, M. W., Bhasin, R. M., Beaudette, D. J., Shann, M. H., Benjamin, E. J. 2016; 30 (3): 49-64

    Abstract

    Faculty vitality is integral to the advancement of higher education. Strengthening vitality is particularly important for mid-career faculty, who represent the largest and most dissatisfied segment. The demands of academic medicine appear to be another factor that may put faculty at risk of attrition. To address these issues, we initiated a ten-month mid-career faculty development program.A mixed-methods quasi-experimental design was used to evaluate the program's impact on faculty and institutional vitality. Pre/post surveys compared participants with a matched reference group. Quantitative data were augmented by interviews and focus groups with multiple stakeholders.At the program's conclusion, participants showed statistically significant gains in knowledge, skills, attitudes, and connectivity when compared to the referents.Given that mid-career faculty development in academic medicine has not been extensively studied, our evaluation provides a useful perspective to guide future initiatives aimed at enhancing the vitality and leadership capacity of mid-career faculty.

    View details for PubMedID 27942418

  • Emerging Genetic Counselor Roles within the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Industries: as Industry Interest Grows in Rare Genetic Disorders, How are Genetic Counselors Joining the Discussion? Journal of genetic counseling Field, T., Brewster, S. J., Towne, M., Campion, M. W. 2016; 25 (4): 708–19

    Abstract

    Traditionally, the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry (BPI) has focused drug development at the mass-market level targeting common medical issues. However, a recent trend is the development of therapies for orphan or rare disorders, including many genetic disorders. Developing treatments for genetic disorders requires an understanding of the needs of the community and translating genomic information to clinical and non-clinical audiences. The core skills of genetic counselors (GCs) include a deep knowledge of genetics and ability to communicate complex information to a broad audience, making GCs a choice fit for this shift in drug development. To date there is limited data defining the roles GCs hold within this industry. This exploratory study aimed to define the roles and motivation of GCs working in BPI, assess job satisfaction, and identify translatable skills and current gaps in GC training programs. The authors surveyed 26 GCs working in BPI in the United States; 79 % work for companies focused on rare disorders. GC positions in BPI are growing, with 57 % of respondents being the first GC in their role. GCs in BPI continue to utilize core genetic counseling competencies, though 72 % felt their training did not fully prepare them for BPI. These data suggest opportunities for exposure to BPI in GC training to better prepare future generations of GCs for these career opportunities. GC satisfaction was high in BPI, notably in areas traditionally reported as less satisfying on the National Society for Genetic Counselors Professional Status Survey: salary and advancement opportunities. BPI's growing interest in rare disorders represents a career opportunity for GCs, addressing both historic areas of dissatisfaction for GCs and BPI's genomic communication needs.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10897-016-9946-9

    View details for PubMedID 27017827

  • Confirmed versus suspected: The social significance of a genetic or non-genetic diagnosis of mitochondrial disease. Mitochondrion Krieg, E., Calderwood, L., Campion, M., Krepkovich, K. E. 2016; 28: 60–66

    Abstract

    This study assessed attitudes and beliefs regarding the importance of a genetic versus non-genetic diagnosis within the mitochondrial disease community. Survey respondents were categorized into two groups - those with a genetic diagnosis, and those with a non-genetic diagnosis of mitochondrial disease. We found that while both groups perceive problems with the support available to adult mitochondrial disease patients, the non-genetic group experiences less medical and social support due to lack of a definitive diagnosis. Understanding the efficacy of existing resources for mitochondrial disease sub-groups will allow for the development or improvement of resources designed to meet patient needs.

    View details for DOI 10.1016/j.mito.2016.03.008

    View details for PubMedID 27017995

  • Acceptability and feasibility of a virtual counselor (VICKY) to collect family health histories GENETICS IN MEDICINE Wang, C., Bickmore, T., Bowen, D. J., Norkunas, T., Campion, M., Cabral, H., Winter, M., Paasche-Orlow, M. 2015; 17 (10): 822-830

    Abstract

    To overcome literacy-related barriers in the collection of electronic family health histories, we developed an animated Virtual Counselor for Knowing your Family History, or VICKY. This study examined the acceptability and accuracy of using VICKY to collect family histories from underserved patients as compared with My Family Health Portrait (MFHP).Participants were recruited from a patient registry at a safety net hospital and randomized to use either VICKY or MFHP. Accuracy was determined by comparing tool-collected histories with those obtained by a genetic counselor.A total of 70 participants completed this study. Participants rated VICKY as easy to use (91%) and easy to follow (92%), would recommend VICKY to others (83%), and were highly satisfied (77%). VICKY identified 86% of first-degree relatives and 42% of second-degree relatives; combined accuracy was 55%. As compared with MFHP, VICKY identified a greater number of health conditions overall (49% with VICKY vs. 31% with MFHP; incidence rate ratio (IRR): 1.59; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.13-2.25; P = 0.008), in particular, hypertension (47 vs. 15%; IRR: 3.18; 95% CI: 1.66-6.10; P = 0.001) and type 2 diabetes (54 vs. 22%; IRR: 2.47; 95% CI: 1.33-4.60; P = 0.004).These results demonstrate that technological support for documenting family history risks can be highly accepted, feasible, and effective.

    View details for DOI 10.1038/gim.2014.198

    View details for Web of Science ID 000362441900011

    View details for PubMedID 25590980

  • NSGC Practice Guideline: Prenatal Screening and Diagnostic Testing Options for Chromosome Aneuploidy JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING Wilson, K. L., Czerwinski, J. L., Hoskovec, J. M., Noblin, S. J., Sullivan, C. M., Harbison, A., Campion, M. W., Devary, K., Devers, P., Singletary, C. N. 2013; 22 (1): 4-15

    Abstract

    The BUN and FASTER studies, two prospective multicenter trials in the United States, validated the accuracy and detection rates of first and second trimester screening previously reported abroad. These studies, coupled with the 2007 release of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Practice Bulletin that endorsed first trimester screening as an alternative to traditional second trimester multiple marker screening, led to an explosion of screening options available to pregnant women. ACOG also recommended that invasive diagnostic testing for chromosome aneuploidy be made available to all women regardless of maternal age. More recently, another option known as Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) became available to screen for chromosome aneuploidy. While screening and testing options may be limited due to a variety of factors, healthcare providers need to be aware of the options in their area in order to provide their patients with accurate and reliable information. If not presented clearly, patients may feel overwhelmed at the number of choices available. The following guideline includes recommendations for healthcare providers regarding which screening or diagnostic test should be offered based on availability, insurance coverage, and timing of a patient's entry into prenatal care, as well as a triage assessment so that a general process can be adapted to unique situations.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10897-012-9545-3

    View details for Web of Science ID 000314028900002

    View details for PubMedID 23179172

  • Zen and the Art of Program Development JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING Campion, M. 2012; 21 (2): 179-180

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10897-011-9440-3

    View details for Web of Science ID 000303890000008

    View details for PubMedID 22127474

  • Transition to the Clinical Doctorate: Attitudes of the Genetic Counseling Training Program Directors in North America JOURNAL OF GENETIC COUNSELING Stuenkel, A. J., Campion, M., Allain, D., Hampel, H. 2012; 21 (1): 136-149

    Abstract

    In North America, genetic counseling is an allied health profession where entry level practitioners currently must hold a master's degree earned from a graduate program accredited by the American Board of Genetic Counseling. This is one of many health care professions that could transition to an entry level clinical doctorate degree. This study explored the attitudes of genetic counseling training program directors toward such a transition. Thirty-one North American program directors were invited to complete an online survey and a follow-up telephone interview. Twenty-one program directors completed the survey and ten directors also completed a follow up phone interview. There was disagreement among the respondents on the issue of transitioning to a clinical doctorate degree (nine in favor, six against and six undecided). Respondents disagreed about whether the transition would lead to higher salaries (six yes, eight no, and seven unsure) or increased professional recognition (eight yes, eight no, and four unsure). Approximately half (n = 10) of directors were not sure if the transition to a clinical doctorate would help or hurt minority recruitment; six thought it would help and four thought it would hurt. However, the majority (n = 13) thought a clinical doctorate would help genetic counselors to obtain faculty positions. If the field transitions to a clinical doctorate, 11 of the directors thought their program would convert, seven were unsure and one thought their program would shut down. Themes identified in interview data included 1) implications for the profession 2) institution-specific considerations and 3) perception of the unknown. Opinions are quite varied at this time regarding the possible transition to the clinical doctorate among genetic counseling training program directors.

    View details for DOI 10.1007/s10897-011-9407-4

    View details for Web of Science ID 000303889000017

    View details for PubMedID 21892706