Literature DB >> 21643981

Population biobanks and returning individual research results: mission impossible or new directions?

Susan E Wallace1, Alastair Kent.   

Abstract

Historically, large-scale longitudinal genomic research studies have not returned individual research results to their participants, as these studies are not intended to find clinically significant information for individuals, but to produce 'generalisable' knowledge for future research. However, this stance is now changing. Commentators now argue that there is an ethical imperative to return clinically significant results and individuals are now expressing a desire to have them. This shift reflects societal changes, such as the rise of social networking and an increased desire to participate in medical decision-making, as well as a greater awareness of genetic information and the increasing ability of clinicians to use this information in health care treatment. This paper will discuss the changes that have prompted genomic research studies to reconsider their position and presents examples of projects that are actively engaged in returning individual research results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21643981     DOI: 10.1007/s00439-011-1021-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Genet        ISSN: 0340-6717            Impact factor:   4.132


  34 in total

1.  Universal risk factors for multifactorial diseases: LifeLines: a three-generation population-based study.

Authors:  Ronald P Stolk; Judith G M Rosmalen; Dirkje S Postma; Rudolf A de Boer; Gerjan Navis; Joris P J Slaets; Johan Ormel; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2007-12-13       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Public expectations for return of results--time to stop being paternalistic?

Authors:  Conrad Fernandez
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 11.229

3.  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

4.  Offering individual genetic research results: context matters.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Wylie Burke
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 17.956

5.  Personal genome research : what should the participant be told?

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; James R Lupski
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 11.639

6.  Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome.

Authors: 
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2004-10-21       Impact factor: 49.962

7.  The emergence of an ethical duty to disclose genetic research results: international perspectives.

Authors:  Bartha Maria Knoppers; Yann Joly; Jacques Simard; Francine Durocher
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2006-07-26       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Communication of biobanks' research results: what do (potential) participants want?

Authors:  Tineke M Meulenkamp; Sjef K Gevers; Jasper A Bovenberg; Gerard H Koppelman; Astrid van Hylckama Vlieg; Ellen M A Smets
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.802

9.  The eMERGE Network: a consortium of biorepositories linked to electronic medical records data for conducting genomic studies.

Authors:  Catherine A McCarty; Rex L Chisholm; Christopher G Chute; Iftikhar J Kullo; Gail P Jarvik; Eric B Larson; Rongling Li; Daniel R Masys; Marylyn D Ritchie; Dan M Roden; Jeffery P Struewing; Wendy A Wolf
Journal:  BMC Med Genomics       Date:  2011-01-26       Impact factor: 3.063

10.  Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks.

Authors:  A Cambon-Thomsen; E Rial-Sebbag; B M Knoppers
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 16.671

View more
  15 in total

1.  The art and science of biobanking.

Authors:  Bartha Maria Knoppers; Thomas J Hudson
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-07-21       Impact factor: 4.132

2.  Willingness to participate in genomics research and desire for personal results among underrepresented minority patients: a structured interview study.

Authors:  Saskia C Sanderson; Michael A Diefenbach; Randi Zinberg; Carol R Horowitz; Margaret Smirnoff; Micol Zweig; Samantha Streicher; Ethylin Wang Jabs; Lynne D Richardson
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-06-22

3.  Risk terminology in biobanking and genetic research: what's in a name?

Authors:  Gwendolyn P Quinn; Heide Castañeda; Tuya Pal; Janique L Rice; Cathy D Meade; Clement K Gwede
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2013-07-03       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 4.  Biobanking past, present and future: responsibilities and benefits.

Authors:  Yvonne G De Souza; John S Greenspan
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 4.177

5.  Attitudes of African-American parents about biobank participation and return of results for themselves and their children.

Authors:  Colin M E Halverson; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2012-05-09       Impact factor: 2.903

6.  Public preferences regarding the return of individual genetic research results: findings from a qualitative focus group study.

Authors:  Juli Murphy Bollinger; Joan Scott; Rachel Dvoskin; David Kaufman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 8.822

7.  Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets.

Authors:  Susan M Wolf; Brittney N Crock; Brian Van Ness; Frances Lawrenz; Jeffrey P Kahn; Laura M Beskow; Mildred K Cho; Michael F Christman; Robert C Green; Ralph Hall; Judy Illes; Moira Keane; Bartha M Knoppers; Barbara A Koenig; Isaac S Kohane; Bonnie Leroy; Karen J Maschke; William McGeveran; Pilar Ossorio; Lisa S Parker; Gloria M Petersen; Henry S Richardson; Joan A Scott; Sharon F Terry; Benjamin S Wilfond; Wendy A Wolf
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Population studies: return of research results and incidental findings Policy Statement.

Authors:  Bartha Maria Knoppers; Mylène Deschênes; Ma'n H Zawati; Anne Marie Tassé
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-07-11       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Returning Individual Genetic Research Results to Research Participants: Uptake and Outcomes Among Patients With Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Angela R Bradbury; Linda Patrick-Miller; Brian L Egleston; Kara N Maxwell; Laura DiGiovanni; Jamie Brower; Dominique Fetzer; Jill Bennett Gaieski; Amanda Brandt; Danielle McKenna; Jessica Long; Jacquelyn Powers; Jill E Stopfer; Katherine L Nathanson; Susan M Domchek
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2018-04-16

10.  Effect of Genetic Information Regarding Salt-Sensitive Hypertension on the Intent to Maintain a Reduced Salt Diet: Implications for Health Communication in Japan.

Authors:  Keiko Miyamoto; Miho Iwakuma; Takeo Nakayama
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.