Literature DB >> 15727261

Disclosure of genetic information obtained through research.

Kimberly A Quaid1, Nenette M Jessup, Eric M Meslin.   

Abstract

The rapid expansion of information and knowledge of genetics has implications for the question of whether, and under what circumstances, information discovered in the course of genetic research should be conveyed to research participants and/or their relatives. The aim of this paper is to propose an ethically defensible solution to a specific case example illustrating this problem. To do this we reviewed the literature to find answers to the following three questions: (1) What do current regulations, guidelines, and commentary say about the disclosure of genetic risk information obtained through research to research participants? (2) What do current regulations, guidelines, and commentary say about the disclosure of genetic risk information obtained through research to the relatives of research subjects? and (3) What do current regulations, guidelines, and commentary say about the disclosure of genetic risk information obtained through research about former research participants who are now deceased? Our conclusion is that current U.S. federal guidelines governing the use of human subjects in research, as well as much of the current literature, do not adequately address the familial dimension inherent in genetic research, are virtually silent on the issue of sharing information of relevance to family members, and do not protect the deceased. It is our belief that this omission needs to be corrected and that explicit guidance on this issue needs to be provided to institutional review boards and researchers alike.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedical and Behavioral Research; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15727261     DOI: 10.1089/gte.2004.8.347

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Test        ISSN: 1090-6576


  12 in total

1.  Changing perspectives in biobank research: from individual rights to concerns about public health regarding the return of results.

Authors:  Joanna Stjernschantz Forsberg; Mats G Hansson; Stefan Eriksson
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-05-27       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Attitudes Toward Return of Genetic Research Results to Relatives, Including After Death: Comparison of Cancer Probands, Blood Relatives, and Spouse/Partners.

Authors:  Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Susan M Wolf; Kari G Chaffee; Marguerite E Robinson; Noralane M Lindor; Deborah R Gordon; Barbara A Koenig; Gloria M Petersen
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2018-04-27       Impact factor: 1.742

3.  Timing and context: important considerations in the return of genetic results to research participants.

Authors:  Kate A McBride; Nina Hallowell; Martin H N Tattersall; Judy Kirk; Mandy L Ballinger; David M Thomas; Gillian Mitchell; Mary-Anne Young
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2015-05-26

4.  Genomic inheritances: disclosing individual research results from whole-exome sequencing to deceased participants' relatives.

Authors:  Ben Chan; Flavia M Facio; Haley Eidem; Sara Chandros Hull; Leslie G Biesecker; Benjamin E Berkman
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 11.229

Review 5.  Biobanking and deceased persons.

Authors:  Anne Marie Tassé
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-06-25       Impact factor: 4.132

6.  Returning individual research results: development of a cancer genetics education and risk communication protocol.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; David I Shalowitz; Kurt D Christensen; Jessica N Everett; Scott Y H Kim; Leon Raskin; Stephen B Gruber
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.742

7.  Disclosure of genetics research results after the death of the patient participant: a qualitative study of the impact on relatives.

Authors:  E Ormondroyd; C Moynihan; M Watson; C Foster; S Davolls; A Ardern-Jones; R Eeles
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2007-05-11       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Incidental findings: the time is not yet ripe for a policy for biobanks.

Authors:  Jennifer Viberg; Mats G Hansson; Sophie Langenskiöld; Pär Segerdahl
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-09-25       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Connecting patients, researchers and clinical genetics services: the experiences of participants in the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study (AOCS).

Authors:  Ashley Crook; Loren Plunkett; Laura E Forrest; Nina Hallowell; Samantha Wake; Kathryn Alsop; Margaret Gleeson; David Bowtell; Gillian Mitchell; Mary-Anne Young
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Ethical issues in measuring biomarkers in children's environmental health.

Authors:  Peter D Sly; Brenda Eskenazi; Jenny Pronczuk; Radim Srám; Fernando Diaz-Barriga; Diego Gonzalez Machin; David O Carpenter; Simona Surdu; Eric M Meslin
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.