Researchers opinions towards the communication of results of biobank research: A survey study

European Journal of Human Genetics

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 258-262

  Meulenkamp, Tineke M ^a   Gevers, Sjef J K ^a   Bovenberg, Jasper A ^a   Smets, Ellen M A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

disclosing results; genetic databases; iobanks; researchers' opinions

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BIOBANK; BLOOD SAMPLING; CONTROLLED STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; FEMALE; GENETIC DATABASE; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRIVACY; PUBLIC OPINION; REVIEW;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RESEARCH PERSONNEL;

EID: 84857189818     PISSN: 10184813     EISSN: 14765438     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2011.216     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. Bovenberg J, Meulenkamp T, Smets E, Gevers S: Biobank research: reporting results to individual participants. Eur J Health Law 2009; 16: 229-247.
2. Ravitsky V, Wilfond BS: Disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006; 6: 8-17. (Pubitemid 44691474)
3. Knoppers BM, Joly Y, Simard J, Durocher F: The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives. Eur J Hum Genet 2006; 14: 1170-1178. (Pubitemid 44642582)
4. Wolf SM, Paradise J, Caga-anan C: The law of incidental findings in human subjects research: establishing researchers' duties. J Law Med Ethics 2008; 36: 361-383.
5. Affleck P: Is it ethical to deny genetic research participants individualised results? J Med Ethics 2009; 35: 209-213.
6. Bredenoord AL, Kroes HY, Cuppen E, Parker M, van Delden JJ: Disclosure of individual genetic data to research participants: the debate reconsidered. Trends Genet 2011; 27: 41-47.
7. Beskow LM, Burke W: Offering individual genetic research results: context matters. Sci Transl Med 2010; 2: 38cm20.
8. Ruiz-Canela M, Valle-Mansilla JI, Sulmasy DP: Researchers' preferences and attitudes on ethical aspects of genomics research: a comparative study between the USA and Spain. J Med Ethics 2009; 35: 251-257.
9. Edwards KL, Lemke AA, Trinidad SB et al: Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers. Public Health Genomics 2011; 14: 337-345.
10. Lemke AA, Trinidad SB, Edwards KL, Starks H, Wiesner GL: Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a national survey of professionals involved in human subjects protection. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2010; 5: 83-91.
11. Heaney C, Tindall G, Lucas J, Haga SB: Researcher practices on returning genetic research results. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers 2010; 14: 821-827.
12. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen (KNAW): Verkenningscommissie Multifactoriële aandoeningen. Multifactoriële aandoeningen in het genomics-tijdperk. Amsterdam: KNAW, 2006.
13. Meulenkamp TM, Gevers SK, Bovenberg JA, Koppelman GH, van Hylckama Vlieg V, Smets EM: Communication of biobanks' research results: what do (potential) participants want? Am J Med Genet A 2010; 152A: 2482-2492.
14. Miller FA, Christensen R, Giacomini M, Robert JS: Duty to disclose what? Querying the putative obligation to return research results to participants. J Med Ethics 2008; 34: 210-213.
15. Facio FM: One size does not fit all. Am J Bioeth 2006; 6: 40-42. (Pubitemid 44691486)
16. Kaufman D, Murphy J, Scott J, Hudson K: Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study. Genet Med 2008; 10: 831-839.
17. Shalowitz DI, Miller FG: The search for clarity in communicating research results to study participants. J Med Ethics 2008; 34: e17.
18. Beskow LM, Dean E: Informed consent for biorepositories: assessing prospective participants' understanding and opinions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17: 1440-1451.
19. McCarty CA, Nair A, Austin DM, Giampietro PF: Informed consent and subject motivation to participate in a large, population-based genomics study: the Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project. Community Genet 2007; 10: 2-9. (Pubitemid 46005795)
20. McBride CM, Koehly LM, Sanderson SC, Kaphingst KA: The behavioral response to personalized genetic information: will genetic risk profiles motivate individuals and families to choose more healthful behaviors? Annu Rev Public Health 2010; 31: 89-103.
21. Christiaans I, Kok TM, van Langen IM et al: Obtaining insurance after DNA diagnostics: a survey among hypertrophic cardiomyopathy mutation carriers. Eur J Hum Genet 2010; 18: 251-253.
22. Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR et al: 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 2010; 3: 574-580.