The Powers of Participatory Medicine

PLoS Biology

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2014, Pages

  Prainsack, Barbara ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EMPOWERMENT; GENETIC RISK; HEALTH LITERACY; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMAN; MEDICAL RECORD; RISK;

GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH RECORDS, PERSONAL; HUMANS; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; RISK;

EID: 84900423114     PISSN: 15449173     EISSN: 15457885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001837     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. FDA (2013) 23andMe, Inc. 11/22/13. Available: http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2013/ucm376296.htm. Accessed 17 February 2014.
2. Conley J (5 December 2013) The revolt of the Cs: class action filed against 23andMe. Genomics Law Report. Available: http://www.genomicslawreport.com/index.php/2013/12/05/the-revolt-of-the-cs-class-action-filed-against-23-and-me/. Accessed 17 February 2014.
3. Sterckx S, Cockbain J, Howard HC, Borry P, (2013) "I prefer a child with...": designer babies, another controversial patent in the arena of direct-to-consumer genomics. Genet Med 15: 923-924.
4. Prainsack B, (8 October 2013) 23andMe's "designer baby" patent: when corporate governance and open science collide. Genomes Unzipped Available: http://www.genomesunzipped.org/2013/10/guest-post-23andmes-designer-baby-patent-when-corporate-governance-and-open-science-collide.php. Accessed 17 February 2014.
5. Frydman G (2013) A patient-centric definition of participatory medicine. Available: http://www.patientdriven.org/2013/03/a-patient-centric-definition-of-participatory-medicine/. Accessed 17 February 2014.
6. Prainsack B, Reardon J, Hindmarsh R, Gottweis H, Naue U, et al. (2008) Misdirected precaution? Nature 456: 34-35.
7. Green RC, Farahany NA, (2014) The FDA is overcautious on consumer genomics. Nature 505: 286-287.
8. Harford T (14 February 2014) The murkier side of transparency. The Financial Times. Available: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/785bd614-9378-11e3-b07c-00144feab7de.html#axzz2tUYPvcYY. Accessed 17 February 2014.
9. Prainsack B, (2013) Let's get real about virtual: online health is here to stay. Genet Res (Camb) 95: 111-113.
10. Prainsack B, (2011) Voting with their mice: personal genome testing and the "participatory turn" in disease research. Account Res 18: 132-147.
11. Prainsack B (2014) Understanding participation: the 'citizen science' of genetics. In: Prainsack B, Schicktanz S, Werner-Felmayer G, editors. Genetics as social practice. Farnham: Ashgate. pp. 147-164.
12. Bucci M, Neresini F (2007) Science and public participation. In: Hackett EJ, Amsterdamska O, Lynch M, and Wajcman J, editors. The handbook of science and technology studies. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. pp. 448-472.
13. Vayena E, Tasiouslas J, (2013) The ethics of participant-led biomedical research. Nat Biotechnol 31: 786-787.
14. Kang J, Shilton K, Estrin D, Burke J, Hansen M, (2012) Self-surveillance privacy. Iowa Law Rev 97: 809-847.
15. Peppet SR, (2012) Privacy & the personal prospectus: should we introduce privacy agents or regulate privacy intermediaries? Iowa Law Review Bulletin 97: 77-93.
16. Watson SM (12 November 2013) You are your data. Slate. Available: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2013/11/quantified_self_self_tracking_data_we_need_a_right_to_use_it.html. Accessed 17 February 2014.