Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: Findings from a qualitative focus group study

Genetics in Medicine

Volumn 14, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 451-457

  Bollinger, Juli Murphy ^a   Scott, Joan ^b   Dvoskin, Rachel ^a   Kaufman, David ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b National Coalition for Health Professional Education in Genetics   (United States)

Author keywords

genetic; individual; IRR; research; results

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; GENETIC RISK; HEALTH CARE AVAILABILITY; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; PERSONAL NEEDS; POPULATION GENETICS; PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICE; PUBLIC OPINION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

FOCUS GROUPS; GENETIC RESEARCH; GENETICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; TRUTH DISCLOSURE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84859608971     PISSN: 10983600     EISSN: 15300366     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2011.66     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. 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.
2. Clayton EW, Ross LF. Implications of disclosing individual results of clinical research. JAMA 2006;295:37; author reply 37-38.
3. Fryer-Edwards K, Fullerton SM. Relationships with test-tubes: where's the reciprocity? Am J Bioeth 2006;6:36-38; author reply W10-12.
4. Manolio TA. Taking our obligations to research participants seriously: disclosing individual results of genetic research. Am J Bioeth 2006;6:32-34; author reply W10-12.
5. Meltzer LA. Undesirable implications of disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006;6:28-30; author reply W10-12.
6. Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, et al. Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations. J Law Med Ethics 2008;36:219-248, 211.
7. Wallace SE, Kent A. Population biobanks and returning individual research results: mission impossible or new directions? Hum Genet 2011;130:393-401.
8. McGuire AL, Caulfield T, Cho MK. Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing. Nat Rev Genet 2008;9:152-156. (Pubitemid 351147709)
9. Shalowitz DI, Miller FG. Disclosing individual results of clinical research: implications of respect for participants. JAMA 2005;294:737-740. (Pubitemid 41159294)
10. Affleck P. Is it ethical to deny genetic research participants individualised results? J Med Ethics 2009;35:209-213.
11. Ravitsky V, Wilfond BS. Disclosing individual genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006;6:8-17. (Pubitemid 44691474)
12. Klitzman R. Questions, complexities, and limitations in disclosing individual genetic results. Am J Bioeth 2006;6:34-36; author reply W10-12.
13. Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, LeRoy L, Hudson K. Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research. Am J Bioeth 2008;8:36-43.
14. Arar N, Seo J, Lee S, et al. Preferences regarding genetic research results: comparing veterans and nonveterans responses. Public Health Genomics 2010;13:431-439.
15. Meulenkamp TM, Gevers SK, Bovenberg JA, Koppelman GH, van Hylckama Vlieg A, Smets EM. Communication of biobanks' research results: what do (potential) participants want? Am J Med Genet A 2010;152A:2482-2492.
16. Sharp RR, Foster MW. Clinical utility and full disclosure of genetic results to research participants. Am J Bioeth 2006;6:42-4; author reply W10-12.
17. Fernandez CV, Santor D, Weijer C, et al. The return of research results to participants: pilot questionnaire of adolescents and parents of children with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2007;48:441-446. (Pubitemid 46340111)
18. Beskow LM, Smolek SJ. Prospective biorepository participants' perspectives on access to research results. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2009;4:99-111.
19. O'Daniel J, Haga SB. Public perspectives on returning genetics and genomics research results. Public Health Genomics 2011;14:346-355.
20. 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.
21. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance, 1999. http://bioethics. georgetown.edu/nbac/hbm.pdf. Accessed 15 August 2011.
22. National Human Genome Research Institute. Federal policy recommendations including HIPAA. http://www.genome.gov/11510216. Updated 2010. Accessed 15 August 2011.
23. Dressler LG. Disclosure of research results from cancer genomic studies: state of the science. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:4270-4276.
24. Office of Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research, National Cancer Institute. Summary: Workshop on release of research results to participants in biospecimen studies. Bethesda, 8-9 July 2010. http://biospecimens.cancer. gov/resources/publications/workshop/rrra.asp. Accessed 15 August 2011.
25. Fabsitz RR, McGuire A, Sharp RR, et al.; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute working group. 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.
26. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Proposed study video. http://www.youtube. com/watch?v=m-x81nkCP8A. Accessed 30 November 2011.
27. NVivo qualitative data analysis software. Version 8. Cambridge, MA: QSR International Pty, 2008.
28. Matsui K, Lie RK, Kita Y, Ueshima H. Ethics of future disclosure of individual risk information in a genetic cohort study: a survey of donor preferences. J Epidemiol 2008;18:217-224.
29. Wendler D, Emanuel E. The debate over research on stored biological samples: what do sources think? Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1457-1462. (Pubitemid 34747478)
30. Tibben A, Niermeijer MF, Roos RA, et al. Understanding the low uptake of presymptomatic DNA testing for Huntington's disease. Lancet 1992;340:1416.