BACKGROUND: Researchers often relate personal experiences of difficulties and challenges with Institutional Review Board (IRB) review of their human genetic research protocols. However, there have been no studies that document the range and frequency of these concerns among researchers conducting human genetic/genomic studies. METHODS: An online anonymous survey was used to collect information from human genetic researchers regarding views about IRB review of genetic protocols. Logistic regression was used to test specific hypotheses. Results from the national online survey of 351 human genomic researchers are summarized in this report. RESULTS: Issues involving considerable discussion with IRBs included reconsent of subjects (51%), protection of participants' personal information (39%) and return of results to participants (34%). Over half of the participants had experienced one or more negative consequences of the IRB review process and approximately 25% had experienced one or more positive consequences. Respondents who had served on an IRB were about 80% more likely to report positive consequences of IRB review than their colleagues who had never served on an IRB (p = 0.03). Survey responses were mixed on the need for reconsent before data sharing and risks related to participant reidentification from genomic data. CONCLUSION: The results from this study provide important perspectives of researchers regarding genetic research review and show lack of consensus on key research ethics issues in genomic research.
BACKGROUND: Researchers often relate personal experiences of difficulties and challenges with Institutional Review Board (IRB) review of their human genetic research protocols. However, there have been no studies that document the range and frequency of these concerns among researchers conducting human genetic/genomic studies. METHODS: An online anonymous survey was used to collect information from human genetic researchers regarding views about IRB review of genetic protocols. Logistic regression was used to test specific hypotheses. Results from the national online survey of 351 human genomic researchers are summarized in this report. RESULTS: Issues involving considerable discussion with IRBs included reconsent of subjects (51%), protection of participants' personal information (39%) and return of results to participants (34%). Over half of the participants had experienced one or more negative consequences of the IRB review process and approximately 25% had experienced one or more positive consequences. Respondents who had served on an IRB were about 80% more likely to report positive consequences of IRB review than their colleagues who had never served on an IRB (p = 0.03). Survey responses were mixed on the need for reconsent before data sharing and risks related to participant reidentification from genomic data. CONCLUSION: The results from this study provide important perspectives of researchers regarding genetic research review and show lack of consensus on key research ethics issues in genomic research.
Authors: Amy L McGuire; Rebecca Fisher; Paul Cusenza; Kathy Hudson; Mark A Rothstein; Deven McGraw; Stephen Matteson; John Glaser; Douglas E Henley Journal: Genet Med Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 8.822
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
Authors: Sarah M Greene; Ann M Geiger; Emily L Harris; Andrea Altschuler; Larissa Nekhlyudov; Mary B Barton; Sharon J Rolnick; Joann G Elmore; Suzanne Fletcher Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2005-07-06 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Bruce E Ellerin; Robert J Schneider; Arnold Stern; Paolo G Toniolo; Silvia C Formenti Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 5.532
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