Literature DB >> 20938159

Patient perspectives on group benefits and harms in genetic research.

A J Goldenberg1, S C Hull, B S Wilfond, R R Sharp.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how the possible effects of genetic research on socially identifiable groups may impact patient willingness to donate biological samples for future genetic studies.
METHODS: Telephone interviews with patients at 5 academic medical centers in the U.S. examined how patients' beliefs about benefits and harms to ones racial or ethnic group shape decisions to participate in genetic research.
RESULTS: Of the 1,113 patients who responded to questions about group harms and benefits, 61% of respondents indicated that potential benefits to their own racial or ethnic group would be a big or moderate part of their decision to donate a sample for genetic research. 63% of black respondents and 57% of white respondents indicated that they were 'very' or 'moderately concerned' about genetic research findings being used to discriminate against people by race or ethnicity. 64% of black and 34% of white respondents reported that their willingness to donate a blood sample would be substantially reduced due to these concerns.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that a key factor in many patients' decisions to donate samples for genetic research is how those studies may impact identifiable racial and ethnic groups. Given the importance of these considerations to many patients, our study highlights a need to address patients' concerns about potential group benefits and harms in the design of future research studies and DNA biobanks.
Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20938159      PMCID: PMC3104869          DOI: 10.1159/000317497

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  30 in total

1.  Protecting communities in research: current guidelines and limits of extrapolation.

Authors:  C Weijer; G Goldsand; E J Emanuel
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  Benefit-sharing and other protections for communities in genetic research.

Authors:  C Weijer
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 3.  Ethical challenges in community-based research.

Authors:  P A Marshall; C Rotimi
Journal:  Am J Med Sci       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 2.378

4.  Genetic research and health disparities.

Authors:  Pamela Sankar; Mildred K Cho; Celeste M Condit; Linda M Hunt; Barbara Koenig; Patricia Marshall; Sandra Soo-Jin Lee; Paul Spicer
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-06-23       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics.

Authors:  L M Beskow; W Burke; J F Merz; P A Barr; S Terry; V B Penchaszadeh; L O Gostin; M Gwinn; M J Khoury
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-11-14       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Ethics in public health research: protecting human subjects: the role of community advisory boards.

Authors:  Sandra Crouse Quinn
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  "What are they going to do with the information?" Latino/Latina and African American perspectives on the Human Genome Project.

Authors:  Amy Schulz; Cleopatra Caldwell; Sarah Foster
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2003-04

8.  Medical privacy and the disclosure of personal medical information: the beliefs and experiences of those with genetic and other clinical conditions.

Authors:  Nancy E Kass; Sara Chandros Hull; Marvin R Natowicz; Ruth R Faden; Laura Plantinga; Lawrence O Gostin; Julia Slutsman
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2004-07-30       Impact factor: 2.802

9.  Community involvement in the ethical review of genetic research: lessons from American Indian and Alaska Native populations.

Authors:  Richard R Sharp; Morris W Foster
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 9.031

10.  A population-based study of Ashkenazi Jewish women's attitudes toward genetic discrimination and BRCA1/2 testing.

Authors:  Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Jane C Weeks; Neil Klar; Judy E Garber
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  15 in total

1.  Engaging African-Americans about biobanks and the return of research results.

Authors:  Colin Me Halverson; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-03-28

Review 2.  Precisely Where Are We Going? Charting the New Terrain of Precision Prevention.

Authors:  Karen M Meagher; Michelle L McGowan; Richard A Settersten; Jennifer R Fishman; Eric T Juengst
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 8.929

3.  Gene-environment interactions and health inequalities: views of underserved communities.

Authors:  Aaron J Goldenberg; Christopher D Hartmann; Laura Morello; Sanjur Brooks; Kari Colón-Zimmermann; Patricia A Marshall
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-03-15

4.  Reporting actionable research results: shared secrets can save lives.

Authors:  Lawrence E Hunter; Christian Hopfer; Sharon F Terry; Marilyn E Coors
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 17.956

Review 5.  Evolving approaches to the ethical management of genomic data.

Authors:  Jean E McEwen; Joy T Boyer; Kathie Y Sun
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 11.639

6.  Attitudes of African Americans toward return of results from exome and whole genome sequencing.

Authors:  Joon-Ho Yu; Julia Crouch; Seema M Jamal; Holly K Tabor; Michael J Bamshad
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.802

7.  Predictors of consent to pharmacogenomics testing in the IDEAL study.

Authors:  Alison B Jazwinski; Paul J Clark; Alexander J Thompson; Stuart C Gordon; Eric J Lawitz; Stephanie Noviello; Clifford A Brass; Lisa D Pedicone; Janice K Albrecht; Mark S Sulkowski; Andrew J Muir
Journal:  Pharmacogenet Genomics       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.089

8.  African American Living Donors' Attitudes About APOL1 Genetic Testing: A Mixed Methods Study.

Authors:  Elisa J Gordon; Daniela Amόrtegui; Isaac Blancas; Catherine Wicklund; John Friedewald; Richard R Sharp
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 8.860

9.  Obligations of the "Gift": Reciprocity and Responsibility in Precision Medicine.

Authors:  Sandra Soo-Jin Lee
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 11.229

10.  Ethical and legal implications of whole genome and whole exome sequencing in African populations.

Authors:  Galen E B Wright; Pieter G J Koornhof; Adebowale A Adeyemo; Nicki Tiffin
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.