Literature DB >> 18547204

Institutional review board approaches to the incidental findings problem.

Moira A Keane1.   

Abstract

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) are confronted with new challenges in the face of expanding technologies while fulfilling their existing regulatory mandate to ensure that plans are in place to protect subjects and to inform them of risks and benefits of research participation. Existing regulations and guidance do not address the issue of incidental findings (IFs), thus leaving awareness of the issue and the application of ethical principles to IRB judgment alone. In order to assure that researchers are aware of the potential for IFs, IRBs must identify which studies are likely to identify IFs and establish what plans should be put into place prior to study initiation to assure the subjects are appropriately informed of the likelihood of IFs, how IFs will be communicated to subjects, and whether the burden of follow-up falls on the researchers or is the subject's responsibility.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18547204      PMCID: PMC2586149          DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00279.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Law Med Ethics        ISSN: 1073-1105            Impact factor:   1.718


  8 in total

1.  Researcher and institutional review board chair perspectives on incidental findings in genomic research.

Authors:  Janet K Williams; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack; Nancy Downing; Laura Shinkunas; Debra Brandt; Christian Simon
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2012-02-21

Review 2.  Incidental findings found in "healthy" volunteers during imaging performed for research: current legal and ethical implications.

Authors:  T C Booth; A Jackson; J M Wardlaw; S A Taylor; A D Waldman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-03-24       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  A closer look at the recommended criteria for disclosing genetic results: perspectives of medical genetic specialists, genomic researchers, and institutional review board chairs.

Authors:  Debra S Brandt; Laura Shinkunas; Stephen L Hillis; Sandra E Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack; Nancy R Downing; Megan F Liu; Lisa L Shah; Janet K Williams; Christian M Simon
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Return of Genetic Research Results to Participants and Families: IRB Perspectives and Roles.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; P Pearl O'Rourke
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

5.  Canadian Research Ethics Board Leadership Attitudes to the Return of Genetic Research Results to Individuals and Their Families.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; P Pearl O'Rourke; Laura M Beskow
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

6.  Researcher perspectives on disclosure of incidental findings in genetic research.

Authors:  Meredith C Meacham; Helene Starks; Wylie Burke; Kelly Edwards
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 1.742

7.  Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Janet K Williams; Laura Shinkunas; Debra Brandt; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.742

8.  Impact of Next Generation Sequencing on the Organization and Funding of Returning Research Results: Survey of Canadian Research Ethics Boards Members.

Authors:  Iris Jaitovich Groisman; Beatrice Godard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.