Perspectives on human microbiome research ethics

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

Volumn 7, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 1-14

  McGuire, Amy L ^a   Achenbaum, Laura S ^a   Whitney, Simon N ^a   Slashinski, Melody J ^b   Versalovic, James ^c   Keitel, Wendy A ^a   McCurdy, Sheryl A ^b  

^a BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

^c TEXAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Data sharing; Ethics; Human microbiome; Informed consent; Policy; Qualitative research; Research; Return of results

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ETHICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERVIEW; LEGAL ASPECT; MALE; METAGENOME; METAGENOMICS; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; PERSONNEL; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH SUBJECT; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; ETHICS, RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; METAGENOME; METAGENOMICS; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); RESEARCH PERSONNEL; RESEARCH SUBJECTS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84864545443     PISSN: 15562646     EISSN: 15562654     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.1     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Albala, I., Doyle, M., & Appelbaum, P. S. (2010). The evolution of consent forms for research: A quarter century of changes. IRB: Ethics and Human Research, 32(3), 7-11.
2. Bergler, J. H., Pennington, A. C., Metcalfe, M., & Freis, E. D. (1980). Informed consent: How much does the patient understand? Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 27(4), 435-440.
3. Beskow, L. M., Burke, W., Merz, J. F., Barr, P. A., Terry, S., Penchaszadeh, V. B. et al. (2001). Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics. Journal of the American Medical Association, 286(18), 2315-2321.
4. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
5. Department of Health and Human Services. (2011). Human subjects research protections: Enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. Federal Register, 76(143), 44512-44531.
6. Fabsitz, R. R., McGuire, A., Sharp, R. R., Puggal, M., Beskow, L. M., Biesecker, L. G. et al. (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. Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics, 3(6), 574-580.
7. Fierer, N., Lauber, C. L., Zhou, N., McDonald, D., Costello, E. K., & Knight, R. (2010). Forensic identification using skin bacterial communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(14), 6477-6481.
8. Guest, G. & MacQueen, K. M. (2008). Handbook for teambased qualitative research. Lanham, MD: Altamira.
9. Hawkins, A. K. & O'Doherty, K. C. (2011). "Who owns your poop?": Insights regarding the intersection of human microbiome research and the ELSI aspects of biobanking and related studies. BMC Medical Genomics, 4, 72.
10. Homer, N., Szelinger, S., Redman, M., Duggan, D., Tembe, W., Muehling, J. et al. (2008). Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genetics, 4(8), e1000167.
11. Institutional Review Board for Baylor College of Medicine and Affiliated Hospitals. Consent to participate in the Human Microbiome Project. Retrieved from http://www.hmpdacc.org/doc/BCM-Consent-Template.pdf.
12. Joffe, S., Cook, E. F., Cleary, P. D., Clark, J. W., & Weeks, J. C. (2001). Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: A cross-sectional survey. Lancet, 358(9295), 1772-1777.
13. Juengst, E. & Huss, J. (2009). From metagenomics to the metagenome: Conceptual change and the rhetoric of translational genomic research. Genomics, Society and Policy, 5(3), 1-19.
14. Kaye, J., Curren, L., Anderson, N., Edwards, K., Fullerton, S. M., Kanellopoulou, N. et al. (2012). From patients to partners: Participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nature Reviews: Genetics, 13(5), 371-376.
15. Lin, Z., Owen, A. B., & Altman, R. B. (2004). Genomic research and human subject privacy. Science, 305(5681), 183.
16. McGuire, A. L., Colgrove, J., Whitney, S. N., Diaz, C. M., Bustillos, D., & Versalovic, J. (2008). Ethical, legal, and social considerations in conducting the Human Microbiome Project. Genome Research, 18(12), 1861-1864.
17. McGuire, A. L. & Gibbs, R. A. (2006). Genetics: No longer deidentified. Science, 312(5772), 370-371.
18. National Bioethics Advisory Commission. (1999). Research involving human biological materials: Ethical issues and policy guidance. Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Vol. 1.Retrieved from http://bioethics.georgetown.edu/nbac/hbm.pdf.
19. NIH Common Fund. (2011). HMP data release and resource sharing guidelines for Human Microbiome Project data production grants. Retrieved from https://commonfund.nih.gov/hmp/datareleaseguidelines.aspx.
20. Ormond, K. E., Cirino, A. L., Helenowski, I. B., Chisholm, R. L., & Wolf, W. A. (2009). Assessing the understanding of biobank participants. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A, 149A(2), 188-198.
21. Peterson, J., Garges, S., Giovanni, M., McInnes, P., Wang, L., Schloss, J. A. et al. (2009). The NIH Human Microbiome Project. Genome Research, 19(12), 2317-2323.
22. Proctor, L. M. (2011). The Human Microbiome Project in 2011 and beyond. Cell Host and Microbe, 10(4), 287-291.
23. Sharp, S. M. (2004). Consent documents for oncology trials: Does anybody read these things? American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 27(6), 570-575.
24. Wolf, S. M., Lawrenz, F. P., Nelson, C. A., Kahn, J. P., Cho, M. K., Clayton, E. W. et al. (2008). Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 36(2), 219-248.