118 research outputs found
“Forward-Thinking” in U.S. Biobanking
Aims: Do biobanks enact policies and plans that allow them to anticipate and respond to potential challenges? If a biobank has one such policy or plan, is it likely to have more? Using survey data from 456 U.S. biobanks, we assess four possible indicators of such “forward-thinking.
Which Results to Return: Subjective Judgments in Selecting Medically Actionable Genes
Background: Advances in genomics have led to calls for returning information about medically actionable genes (MAGs) to patients, research subjects, biobank participants, and through screening programs, the general adult population. Which MAGs are returned affects the harms and benefits of every genetic testing endeavor. Despite published recommendations of selection criteria for MAGs to return, scant data exist regarding how decision makers actually apply such criteria
Recommended from our members
Observed suppression of ozone formation at extremely high temperatures due to chemical and biophysical feedbacks
Ground level ozone concentrations ([O3]) typically show a direct linear relationship with surface air temperature. Three decades of California measurements provide evidence of a statistically significant change in the ozone-temperature slope (ΔmO3-T) under extremely high temperatures (> 312 K). This ΔmO3-T leads to a plateau or decrease in [O3], reflecting the diminished role of nitrogen oxide sequestration by peroxyacetyl nitrates and reduced biogenic isoprene emissions at high temperatures. Despite inclusion of these processes in global and regional chemistry-climate models, a statistically significant change in ΔmO3-T has not been noted in prior studies. Future climate projections suggest a more frequent and spatially widespread occurrence of this ΔmO3-T response, confounding predictions of extreme ozone events based on the historically observed linear relationship
The Invisible Hand in Clinical Research: The Study Coordinator's Critical Role in Human Subjects Protection
Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74962/1/j.1748-720X.2002.tb00410.x.pd
A place for genetic uncertainty: Parents valuing an unknown in the meaning of disease
Klinefelter, Turner, and fragile X syndromes are conditions defined by a genetic or chromosomal variant. The timing of diagnosis, tests employed, specialists involved, symptoms evident, and prognoses available vary considerably within and across these syndromes, but all three share in common a diagnosis verified through a molecular or cytogenetic test. The genetic or chromosomal variant identified designates a syndrome, even when symptoms associated with the particular syndrome are absent. This article analyzes interviews conducted with parents and grandparents of children with these syndromes from across the US to explore how they interpret a confirmed genetic diagnosis that is associated with a range of possible symptoms that may never be exhibited. Parents’ responses indicate that they see the genetic aspects of the syndrome as stable, permanent and authoritative. But they allow, and even embrace, uncertainty about the condition by focusing on variation between diagnosed siblings, the individuality of their diagnosed child, his or her accomplishments, and other positive aspects that go beyond the genetic diagnosis. Some families counter the genetic diagnosis by arguing that in the absence of symptoms, the syndrome does not exist. They use their own expertise to question the perceived certainty of the genetic diagnosis and to employ the diagnosis strategically. These multiple and often conflicting evaluations of the diagnostic label reveal the rich ways families make meaning of the authority attributed to genetic diagnosis
Genomic Research with the Newly Dead: A Crossroads for Ethics and Policy
Recent advances in next generation sequencing along with high hopes for genomic medicine have inspired interest in genomic research with the newly dead. However, applicable law does not adequately determine ethical or policy responses to such research. In this paper we propose that such research stands at a crossroads between other more established biomedical clinical and research practices. In addressing the ethical and policy issues raised by a particular research project within our institution comparatively with these other practices, we illustrate the moral significance of paying careful heed to where one looks for guidance in responding to ethical questions raised by a novel endeavor
The Meaning of Genetic Research Results: Reflections from Individuals with and without a Known Genetic Disorder
In the debate about whether to return individual genetic results to research participants, consideration of the nature of results has taken precedence over contextual factors associated with different study designs and populations. We conducted in-depth interviews with 24 individuals who participated in a genotype-driven study of cystic fibrosis: 9 of the individuals had cystic fibrosis, 15 had participated as healthy volunteers, and all had gene variants of interest to the researchers. These interviews revealed that the two groups had different ideas about the meaningfulness of genetic results. Our findings point to the importance of understanding research context, such as participants’ relationship with the researcher and whether they have the disease condition under study, when considering whether to return individual results
Automatic Placement of Genomic Research Results in Medical Records: Do Researchers Have a Duty? Should Participants Have a Choice?
In genomics research, it is becoming common practice to return individualized primary and incidental findings to participants and several ongoing major studies have begun to automatically transfer these results to a participant's clinical medical record. This paper explores who should decide whether to place genomic research findings into a clinical medical record. Should participants make this decision, or does a researcher's duty to place this information in a medical record override the participant's autonomy? We argue that there are no clear ethical, legal, professional, or regulatory duties that mandate placement without the consent of the participant. We conclude that informing participants of results, together with a clear explanation, relevant recommendations and referral sources, and the option to consent to placement in the medical records will best discharge researchers' ethical and legal duties towards participants
Recommendations for ethical approaches to genotype-driven research recruitment
Recruiting research participants based on genetic information generated about them in a prior study is a potentially powerful way to study the functional significance of human genetic variation. However, it also presents significant ethical challenges that, to date, have received only minimal consideration. We convened a multi-disciplinary workshop to discuss key issues relevant to the conduct and oversight of genotype-driven recruitment and to translate those considerations into practical policy recommendations. Workshop participants were invited from around the U.S., and included genomic researchers and study coordinators, research participants, clinicians, bioethics scholars, experts in human research protections, and government representatives. Discussion was directed by experienced facilitators and informed by empirical data collected in a national survey of IRB chairs and in-depth interviews with research participants in studies where genotype-driven recontact occurred. A high degree of consensus was attained on the resulting 7 recommendations, which cover informed consent disclosures and choices, the process for how and by whom participants are recontacted, the disclosure of individual genetic research results, and the importance of tailoring approaches based on specific contextual factors. These recommendations are intended to represent a balanced approach—protecting research participants, yet avoiding overly restrictive policies that hinder advancement on important scientific questions
- …