Attitudes about the use of newborn dried blood spots for research: A survey of underrepresented parents

Academic Pediatrics

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 451-457

  Hendrix, Kristin S ^a   Meslin, Eric M ^b   Carroll, Aaron E ^a   Downs, Stephen M ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Indiana University   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioethics; Conjoint analysis; Dried blood spots; Newborn blood spots; Newborn screening; Residual blood spots

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHILD; DRIED BLOOD SPOT TESTING; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; IDENTITY; INFANT; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; NEWBORN; PARENT; PARENTAL CONSENT; PEDIATRICS; PRESCHOOL CHILD; REVIEW; SCHOOL CHILD; UNITED STATES; URBAN AREA;

BIOETHICS; CONJOINT ANALYSIS; DRIED BLOOD SPOTS; NEWBORN BLOOD SPOTS; NEWBORN SCREENING; RESIDUAL BLOOD SPOTS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AFRICAN AMERICANS; ATTITUDE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BLOOD SPECIMEN COLLECTION; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CONFIDENTIALITY; DECISION MAKING; EUROPEAN CONTINENTAL ANCESTRY GROUP; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEONATAL SCREENING; PARENTAL CONSENT; PARENTS; PATIENT SELECTION; POVERTY; QUESTIONNAIRES; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84888319292     PISSN: 18762859     EISSN: 18762867     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acap.2013.04.010     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Guthrie R, Whitney S. Phenylketonuria: Detection in the Newborn Infant as a Routine Hospital Procedure. Washington, DC: US Dept of Health Education and Welfare; 1964. Children's Bureau Publication 419.
2. Therrell B, Adams J. Newborn screening in North America. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007;30:447-465.
3. Indiana State Department of Health. Newborn screening. Available at: http://www.in.gov/isdh/20215.htm. Accessed May 15, 2013.
4. Indiana State Department of Health. Maternal and Children's Special Health Care Services. Genomics and Newborn Screening Program. An introduction to Indiana's newborn screening program. Available at: http://www.in.gov/isdh/ files/Introduction-to-Newborn-Screening.ppt. Accessed May 15, 2013.
5. Olney R, Moore C, Ojodu J, et al. Storage and use of residual dried blood spots from state newborn screening programs. J Pediatr. 2006;148:618-622.
6. Indiana Genetic Alliance, funded by the Health Resource and Service Administration (HRSA). Maternal and Child Health Bureau. Genetic Services Branch. Quality assessment of the newborn screening system. Baby's first test. 2012. Available at: http://www.babysfirsttest.org/newborn-screening/about-site. Accessed May 31, 2012.
7. Nelson KB, Grether JK, Croen LA, et al. Neuropeptides and neurotrophins in neonatal blood of children with autism or mental retardation. Ann Neurol. 2001;49:597-606.
8. Burse VW, DeGuzman MR, Korver MP, et al. Preliminary investigation of the use of dried-blood spots for the assessment of in utero exposure to environmental pollutants. Biochem Mol Med. 1997;61: 236-239.
9. McDade T, Williams S, Snodgrass J. What a drop can do: dried blood spots as a minimally invasive method for integrating biomarkers into population-based research. Demography. 2007;44:899-925.
10. Hollegaard M, Grauholm J, Børglum A, et al. Genome-wide scans using archived neonatal dried blood spot samples. BMC Genomics. 2009;10:297.
11. Hollegaard MV, Grove J, Thorsen P, et al. High-throughput genotyping on archived dried blood spot samples. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2009;13:173-179.
12. McDonald CJ, Overhage JM, Barnes M, et al. The Indiana network for patient care: A working local health information infrastructure. An example of a working infrastructure collaboration that links data from five health systems and hundreds of millions of entries. Health Aff. 2005;24:1214-1220.
13. Lewis MH, Goldenberg A, Anderson R, et al. State laws regarding the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples. Pediatrics. 2011;127:703-712.
14. Dobson A. The Texas newborn blood spot saga continues. Genomics Law Rep. Available at: http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2010/03/01/the-texas- newborn-blood-spot-saga-continues/; 2010. Accessed May 15, 2013.
15. Use of newborn screening blood spots after completion of newborn screening. Available at: http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/lab/nbsBloodspotsUse.shtm. Accessed May 15, 2013.
16. Clausen JA, Seidenfeld MA, Deasy LC. Parent attitudes toward participation of their children in polio vaccine trials. Am J Public Health Nations Health. 1954;44:1526-1536.
17. Caldwell PH, Butow PN, Craig JC. Parents' attitudes to children's participation in randomized controlled trials. J Pediatr. 2003;142: 554-559.
18. Bernhardt BA, Tambor ES, Fraser G, et al. Parents' and children's attitudes toward the enrollment of minors in genetic susceptibility research: implications for informed consent. Am J Med Genet A. 2003;116A:315-323.
19. Neidich AB, Joseph JW, Ober C, et al. Empirical data about women's attitudes towards a hypothetical pediatric biobank. Am J Med Genet A. 2008;146:297-304.
20. Kaufman D, Geller G, Leroy L, et al. Ethical implications of including children in a large biobank for genetic-epidemiologic research: A qualitative study of public opinion. Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet. 2008;148C:31-39.
21. Tarini B, Goldenberg A, Singer D, et al. Not without my permission: parents' willingness to permit use of newborn screening samples for research. Public Health Genomics. 2010;13:125-130.
22. Davey A, French D, Dawkins H, O'Leary. Newmothers' awareness of newborn screening, and their attitudes to the retention and use of screening samples for research purposes. Genomics Society and Policy. 2005;1:41-51.
23. Fleck L, Mongoven A, Marzec S. Informing the Debate: Stored Blood Spots-Ethical and Policy Challenges. East Lansing, Mich: Institute for Public Policy and Social Research; 2008. Available at: http://ippsr.msu.edu/ Publications/ARBloodSpots.pdf. Accessed August 13, 2013.
24. Rothwell E, Anderson R, Goldenberg A, et al. Assessing public attitudes on the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples: A focus group study. Social Sci Med. 2012;74:1305-1309.
25. Botkin JR, Rothwell E, Anderson R, et al. Public attitudes regarding the use of residual newborn screening specimens for research. Pediatrics. 2012;129:231-238.
26. Therrell BL Jr, Hannon WH, Bailey DB Jr, et al. Committee report. Considerations and recommendations for national guidance regarding the retention and use of residual dried blood spot specimens after newborn screening. Genet Med. 2011;13:621-624.
27. Pullman D, Etchegary H, Gallagher K, et al. Personal privacy, public benefits, and biobanks: A conjoint analysis of policy priorities and public perceptions. Genet Med. 2012;14:229-235.
28. Orme B. Getting Started With Conjoint Analysis. Madison, Wisc: Research Publishers LLC; 2009.
29. Curry J. Understanding conjoint analysis in 15 minutes. Sequim, Wash: Sawtooth Software, Inc; 1996. Sawtooth Software Research Paper Series. Available at: http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/undca15.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2013.
30. SPSS Inc. SPSS Conjoint 17.0. Chicago, Ill: SPSS Inc., 2008.
31. SPSS Inc. SPSS forWindows, Release 17.0.0. Chicago, Ill: SPSS; 2008.
32. Steele LS, Glazier RH, Lin E, et al. Using administrative data to measure ambulatory mental health service provision in primary care. Med Care. 2004;42:960-965.
33. Arnold CL, Davis TC, Frempong JO, et al. Assessment of newborn screening parent education materials. Pediatrics. 2006;117(5 pt 2): S320-S325.
34. United States Census Bureau. State and county quick facts: Indiana. Available at: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/18000.html. Accessed March 2, 2013.
35. Stegmayr B, Asplund K. Informed consent for genetic research on blood stored for more than a decade: A population based study. BMJ. 2002;325:634-635.
36. Molster C, Maxwell S, Youngs L, et al. Blueprint for a deliberative public forum on biobanking policy: were theoretical principles achievable in practice? Health Expect. 2013;16:211-224.
37. O'Doherty KC, Hawkins AK, Burgess MM. Involving citizens in the ethics of biobank research: informing institutional policy through structured public deliberation. Soc Sci Med. 2012;75: 1604-1611.