Literature DB >> 19346960

Veterans' attitudes regarding a database for genomic research.

David Kaufman1, Juli Murphy, Lori Erby, Kathy Hudson, Joan Scott.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Large cohort studies to investigate interactions between genes, environment, and lifestyle require large representative samples of the population. The Department of Veterans Affairs health care system is uniquely positioned to carry out such research, with a large patient population and a sophisticated system of electronic medical records. As Veterans Affairs considers establishing a large database of genetic information and medical records for research purposes, a survey of 931 Veterans Affairs patients was carried out to measure their willingness to participate, what their concerns would be, and their preferences about some aspects of study design.
METHODS: A sample of veterans who receive Veterans Affairs health care was surveyed online in April and May of 2008. The proposed genomic study was described to respondents, who then were asked about their support for the study and willingness to participate, and their opinions about the study and some of its components. A descriptive analysis examined differences in attitudes among demographic groups, and whether general beliefs were associated with support or willingness to participate.
RESULTS: Most respondents (83%) said the database should definitely or probably be created, and overall, 71% said they would definitely or probably participate.
CONCLUSION: Majorities of Veterans Affairs health patients in a broad range of demographic groups supported the establishment of a genomic database and showed willingness to participate. Although the desire to learn about one's own health from the study was high, altruistic characteristics were strongly related to whether or not veterans would participate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19346960     DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31819994f8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  20 in total

1.  Considerations in the construction of an instrument to assess attitudes regarding critical illness gene variation research.

Authors:  Bradley D Freeman; Carie R Kennedy; Dragana Bolcic-Jankovic; Alexander Eastman; Ellen Iverson; Erica Shehane; Aaron Celious; Jennifer Barillas; Brian Clarridge
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 1.742

2.  Public Attitudes toward Consent and Data Sharing in Biobank Research: A Large Multi-site Experimental Survey in the US.

Authors:  Saskia C Sanderson; Kyle B Brothers; Nathaniel D Mercaldo; Ellen Wright Clayton; Armand H Matheny Antommaria; Sharon A Aufox; Murray H Brilliant; Diego Campos; David S Carrell; John Connolly; Pat Conway; Stephanie M Fullerton; Nanibaa' A Garrison; Carol R Horowitz; Gail P Jarvik; David Kaufman; Terrie E Kitchner; Rongling Li; Evette J Ludman; Catherine A McCarty; Jennifer B McCormick; Valerie D McManus; Melanie F Myers; Aaron Scrol; Janet L Williams; Martha J Shrubsole; Jonathan S Schildcrout; Maureen E Smith; Ingrid A Holm
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Ethics watch: the G.I. genome: ethical implications of genome sequencing in the military.

Authors:  Megan Allyse; Lauren C Milner; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 53.242

4.  Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues (ELSI) in Clinical Genetics Research.

Authors:  Daryl Pullman; Holly Etchegary
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2021

5.  Principles of human subjects protections applied in an opt-out, de-identified biobank.

Authors:  Jill Pulley; Ellen Clayton; Gordon R Bernard; Dan M Roden; Daniel R Masys
Journal:  Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.689

6.  The MICHR Genomic DNA BioLibrary: An Empirical Study of the Ethics of Biorepository Development.

Authors:  Blake J Roessler; Nicholas H Steneck; Lisa Connally
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 7.  Mind the gap: resources required to receive, process and interpret research-returned whole genome data.

Authors:  Dana C Crawford; Jessica N Cooke Bailey; Farren B S Briggs
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-06-03       Impact factor: 4.132

8.  Testing an online, dynamic consent portal for large population biobank research.

Authors:  Daniel B Thiel; Jodyn Platt; Tevah Platt; Susan B King; Nicole Fisher; Robert Shelton; Sharon L R Kardia
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 2.000

9.  Community engagement with genetics: public perceptions and expectations about genetics research.

Authors:  Holly Etchegary; Jane Green; Patrick Parfrey; Catherine Street; Daryl Pullman
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-08-23       Impact factor: 3.377

Review 10.  The research participant perspective related to the conduct of genomic cohort studies: A systematic review of the quantitative literature.

Authors:  Deborah Goodman; Deborah Bowen; Lari Wenzel; Paris Tehrani; Francis Fernando; Araksi Khacheryan; Farihah Chowdhury; Catherine O Johnson; Karen Edwards
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 3.046

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.