Qualitative assessment of study materials and communication strategies used in studies that include DNA collection

American Journal of Medical Genetics, Part A

Volumn 155, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 2721-2731

  Jenkins, Mary M ^a   Reed Gross, Erika ^b   Barfield, Wanda D ^c   Prue, Christine E ^d   Gallagher, Margaret L ^e   Rasmussen, Sonja A ^a   Honein, Margaret A ^a  

^a NATIONAL CENTER ON BIRTH DEFECTS AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES   (United States)

^b WESTAT   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHRONIC DISEASE PREVENTION AND HEALTH PROMOTION   (United States)

^d NATIONAL CENTER FOR EMERGING AND ZOONOTIC INFECTIOUS DISEASES   (United States)

^e NATIONAL CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

Birth defects; Communication; Focus group; Genetic epidemiology; Genetic research; Population based studies; Public attitudes; Qualitative research

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIRTH DEFECT; CHEEK MUCOSA; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA COLLECTION METHOD; DNA DETERMINATION; FEMALE; GENETIC RISK; HUMAN; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MATERIALS TESTING; MATERNAL ATTITUDE; PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH; POPULATION BASED CASE CONTROL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS;

BIRTH WEIGHT; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COMMUNICATION; CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DATA COLLECTION; DNA; ENVIRONMENT; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; GENETIC TESTING; GEORGIA; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; INFANT; MALE; MOTIVATION; MOUTH MUCOSA; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REAGENT KITS, DIAGNOSTIC; SPECIMEN HANDLING;

EID: 80054890713     PISSN: 15524825     EISSN: 15524833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.34263     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aagaard-Tillery K, Sibai B, Spong CY, Momirova V, Wendel G Jr, Wenstrom K, Samuels P, Cotroneo M, Moawad A, Sorokin Y, Miodovnik M, Meis P, O'Sullivan MJ, Conway D, Wapner RJ. 2006. Sample bias among women with retained DNA samples for future genetic studies. Obstet Gynecol 108:1115-1120.
2. Achter P, Parrott R, Silk K. 2004. African Americans' opinions about human-genetics research. Politics Life Sci 23:60-66.
3. ATLAS.ti SSDG. 2003-2008. ATLAS.ti Visual Qualitative Data Analysis. Version 5.0.67. Berlin: ATLAS.ti SSDG.
4. BBB. 2011. Better business bureau tips-Scam. Available at: Date accessed: 2/23/2011.
5. Beskow LM, Dean E. 2008. Informed consent for biorepositories: Assessing prospective participants' understanding and opinions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 17:1440-1451.
6. Beskow LM, Burke W, Merz JF, Barr PA, Terry S, Penchaszadeh VB, Gostin LO, Gwinn M, Khoury MJ. 2001. Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics. JAMA 286:2315-2321.
7. Bookman EB, Langehorne AA, Eckfeldt JH, Glass KC, Jarvik GP, Klag M, Koski G, Motulsky A, Wilfond B, Manolio TA, Fabsitz RR, Luepker RV. 2006. Reporting genetic results in research studies: Summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group. Am J Med Genet Part A 140A:1033-1040.
8. Bryant EE, Kovar MG, Miller H. 1975. A study of the effect of remuneration upon response in the health and nutrition examination survey, United States. Vital Health Stat 2:1-23.
9. Catz DS, Green NS, Tobin JN, Lloyd-Puryear MA, Kyler P, Umemoto A, Cernoch J, Brown R, Wolman F. 2005. Attitudes about genetics in underserved, culturally diverse populations. Commun Genet 8:161-172.
10. Crider KS, Reefhuis J, Woomert A, Honein MA. 2006. Racial and ethnic disparity in participation in DNA collection at the Atlanta site of the National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Am J Epidemiol 164:805-812.
11. Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR, Puggal M, Beskow LM, Biesecker LG, Bookman E, Burke W, Burchard EG, Church G, Clayton EW, Eckfeldt JH, Fernandez CV, Fisher R, Fullerton SM, Gabriel S, Gachupin F, James C, Jarvik GP, Kittles R, Leib JR, O'Donnell C, O'Rourke PP, Rodriguez LL, Schully SD, Shuldiner AR, Sze RK, Thakuria JV, Wolf SM, Burke GL. 2010. Ethical and practical guidelines for reporting genetic research results to study participants: Updated guidelines from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group. Circ Cardiovasc Genet 3:574-580.
12. FBI. 2011. Federal Bureau of Investigations investigative programs common fraud schemes. Available at: Date accessed: 2/23/2011.
13. Freeman B, Powell J, Ball D, Hill L, Craig I, Plomin R. 1997. DNA by mail: An inexpensive and noninvasive method for collecting DNA samples from widely dispersed populations. Behav Genet 27:251-257.
14. Gerdes M, Bernbaum J. 1998. Follow-up care of the low birth weight infant. Indian J Pediatr 65:829-839.
15. Grady C. 2001. Money for research participation: Does in jeopardize informed consent? Am J Bioeth 1:40-44.
16. Jenkins MM, Rasmussen SA, Moore CA, Honein MA. 2008. Ethical issues raised by incorporation of genetics into the National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Am J Med Genet Part C 148C:40-46.
17. Jenkins MM, Reed-Gross E, Rasmussen SA, Barfield WD, Prue CE, Gallagher ML, Honein MA. 2009. Maternal attitudes toward DNA collection for gene-environment studies: A qualitative research study. Am J Med Genet Part A 149A:2378-2386.
18. Krueger RA. 1994. Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
19. Macklin R. 1981. On paying money to research subjects: 'due' and 'undue' inducements. IRB 3:1-6.
20. McCormick MC. 1985. The contribution of low birth weight to infant mortality and childhood morbidity. N Engl J Med 312:82-90.
21. McCormick MC, Shapiro S, Starfield BH. 1980. Rehospitalization in the first year of life for high-risk survivors. Pediatrics 66:991-999.
22. McNeill P. 1997. Paying people to participate in research: Why not? A response to Wilkinson and Moore. Bioethics 11:390-396.
23. McQuillan GM, Pan Q, Porter KS. 2006. Consent for genetic research in a general population: An update on the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey experience. Genet Med 8:354-360.
24. Meulenbelt I, Droog S, Trommelen GJ, Boomsma DI, Slagboom PE. 1995. High-yield noninvasive human genomic DNA isolation method for genetic studies in geographically dispersed families and populations. Am J Hum Genet 57:1252-1254.
25. Min JL, Lakenberg N, Bakker-Verweij M, Suchiman E, Boomsma DI, Slagboom PE, Meulenbelt I. 2006. High microsatellite and SNP genotyping success rates established in a large number of genomic DNA samples extracted from mouth swabs and genotypes. Twin Res Hum Genet 9:501-506.
26. Moorman PG, Skinner CS, Evans JP, Newman B, Sorenson JR, Calingaert B, Susswein L, Crankshaw TS, Hoyo C, Schildkraut JM. 2004. Racial differences in enrolment in a cancer genetics registry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13:1349-1354.
27. NBAC. 1999. Research involving human biological materials: Ethical issues and policy guidance. Volume I: Report and recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Rockville, Maryland. August 1999. Available at: Date accessed: 2/23/2011.
28. Patton M. 2002. Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 3rd edition. Newbury Park: SAGE Publications.
29. Singer E, Bossarte RM. 2006. Incentives for survey participation when are they "coercive"? Am J Prev Med 31:411-418.
30. Smith VJ, Jenkins MM, Sturchio C, Gallagher M, Hobbs CA. 2006. Self-collected buccal cell samples: DNA yield and participation rates. ASHG 56th Annual Meeting Abstract 2267/A. New Orleans, LA.
31. VanderWalde A. 2005. Undue inducement: The only objection to payment? Am J Bioeth 5:25-27.
32. Yoon PW, Rasmussen SA, Lynberg MC, Moore CA, Anderka M, Carmichael SL, Costa P, Druschel C, Hobbs CA, Romitti PA, Langlois PH, Edmonds LD. 2001. The National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Public Health Rep 116:32-40.