Literature DB >> 17618487

How does the collection of genetic test results affect research participants?

David Wendler1, Rebecca Pentz.   

Abstract

The collection of genetic test results has become routine in clinical research. Yet, there are few data on the impact of this practice. The present study provides the first empirical data that we are aware of on the impact this practice has on research participants. The findings suggest that collection of genetic test results in the research setting increases many individuals' desire to know the results themselves. Some respondents attributed this effect to the fact that the data existed, while others did not want investigators to have information about them that they did not possess. A smaller proportion of respondents assumed that investigators who had collected genetic test results would monitor their clinical significance over time. These respondents were less inclined to want to know their genetic test results once an investigator was aware of them. Investigators and IRBs should recognize these phenomena and address them in the design and conduct of studies which collect genetic information. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17618487     DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31823

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med Genet A        ISSN: 1552-4825            Impact factor:   2.802


  10 in total

1.  Not so simple: a quasi-experimental study of how researchers adjudicate genetic research results.

Authors:  Robin Zoe Hayeems; Fiona Alice Miller; Li Li; Jessica Peace Bytautas
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Preferences regarding genetic research results: comparing veterans and nonveterans responses.

Authors:  N Arar; J Seo; S Lee; H E Abboud; L A Copeland; P Noel; M Parchman
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 2.000

3.  Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Mwenza Blell; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Lorraine Cowley; Stephanie O M Dyke; Clara Gaff; Robert Green; Alison Hall; Amber L Johns; Bartha M Knoppers; Stephanie Mulrine; Christine Patch; Eva Winkler; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between.

Authors:  Gail P Jarvik; Laura M Amendola; Jonathan S Berg; Kyle Brothers; Ellen W Clayton; Wendy Chung; Barbara J Evans; James P Evans; Stephanie M Fullerton; Carlos J Gallego; Nanibaa' A Garrison; Stacy W Gray; Ingrid A Holm; Iftikhar J Kullo; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Cathy McCarty; Cynthia A Prows; Heidi L Rehm; Richard R Sharp; Joseph Salama; Saskia Sanderson; Sara L Van Driest; Marc S Williams; Susan M Wolf; Wendy A Wolf; Wylie Burke
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-05-08       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Should we disclose amyloid imaging results to cognitively normal individuals?

Authors:  Joshua D Grill; David K Johnson; Jeffrey M Burns
Journal:  Neurodegener Dis Manag       Date:  2013-02

6.  Informed Consent in Translational Genomics: Insufficient Without Trustworthy Governance.

Authors:  Wylie Burke; Laura M Beskow; Susan Brown Trinidad; Stephanie M Fullerton; Kathleen Brelsford
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 1.718

7.  Communicating the results of clinical research to participants: attitudes, practices, and future directions.

Authors:  David I Shalowitz; Franklin G Miller
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 11.069

8.  Informed consent for return of incidental findings in genomic research.

Authors:  Paul S Appelbaum; Cameron R Waldman; Abby Fyer; Robert Klitzman; Erik Parens; Josue Martinez; W Nicholson Price; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Acknowledging awareness: informing families of individual research results for patients in the vegetative state.

Authors:  Mackenzie Graham; Charles Weijer; Andrew Peterson; Lorina Naci; Damian Cruse; Davinia Fernández-Espejo; Laura Gonzalez-Lara; Adrian M Owen
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 2.903

10.  Recruiting to preclinical Alzheimer's disease clinical trials through registries.

Authors:  Joshua D Grill
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement (N Y)       Date:  2017-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.