Literature DB >> 21673746

Opinions and intentions of parents of an autistic child toward genetic research results: two typical profiles.

Laurence Baret1, Beatrice Godard.   

Abstract

Returning results to research participants is increasingly acknowledged in research ethics guidelines. But few research teams actually do it or provide mechanisms for offering it as an option. We explored the perspective of parents of an autistic child participating in genetic research. In all, 388 questionnaires were sent to 194 parents; 158 questionnaires were completed (89 mothers and 69 fathers), giving a response rate of 41%. 97% of respondents (n=153) fully expressed a strong desire to receive research results, either general or individual ones. The survey solicited parents' opinions as to what means could be put in place to return research results. The majority held the research team responsible for returning individual results (79.7%, n=126). They indicated that it should occur at the completion of the research project (69%, n=109), by mail (75.3%, n=119). Over three quarters felt the Ministry of Health should cover the associated costs (77.8%, n=123). If the communication of individual findings, whether positive or negative, were to be possible, these would allow some respondents 'to be prepared for the future' (37%, n=57), without necessarily having practical benefits (21%, n=32), but at least bringing them 'relief or understanding' (14%, n=21). Moreover, parents were clear about the difference between research and clinical settings. This study underlines the importance of broadening the discussion about the communication of research results, especially individual ones. We believe that the integration of different perspectives--those of researchers, clinicians, ethics committees and participants--will enrich the debate and offer enlightenment for future ethical guidelines.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21673746      PMCID: PMC3198138          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2011.106

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  22 in total

1.  Considerations and costs of disclosing study findings to research participants.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Chris Skedgel; Charles Weijer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Public health and genetics--a dangerous combination?

Authors:  Angela Brand
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  Disclosing individual results of clinical research: implications of respect for participants.

Authors:  David I Shalowitz; Franklin G Miller
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Implications of disclosing individual results of clinical research.

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton; Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-01-04       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Not so simple: a quasi-experimental study of how researchers adjudicate genetic research results.

Authors:  Robin Zoe Hayeems; Fiona Alice Miller; Li Li; Jessica Peace Bytautas
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-03-16       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 6.  Returning genetic research results to individuals: points-to-consider.

Authors:  Gaile Renegar; Christopher J Webster; Steffen Stuerzebecher; Lea Harty; Susan E Ide; Beth Balkite; Taryn A Rogalski-Salter; Nadine Cohen; Brian B Spear; Diane M Barnes; Celia Brazell
Journal:  Bioethics       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.898

7.  Reporting genetic results in research studies: summary and recommendations of an NHLBI working group.

Authors:  Ebony B Bookman; Aleisha A Langehorne; John H Eckfeldt; Kathleen C Glass; Gail P Jarvik; Michael Klag; Greg Koski; Arno Motulsky; Benjamin Wilfond; Teri A Manolio; Richard R Fabsitz; Russell V Luepker
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 2.802

8.  Avoiding versus seeking: the relationship of information seeking to avoidance, blunting, coping, dissonance, and related concepts.

Authors:  Donald O Case; James E Andrews; J David Johnson; Suzanne L Allard
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2005-07

9.  Receiving a summary of the results of a trial: qualitative study of participants' views.

Authors:  Mary Dixon-Woods; Clare Jackson; Kate C Windridge; Sara Kenyon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-01-09

10.  Disclosure of the right of research participants to receive research results: an analysis of consent forms in the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Eric Kodish; Shaureen Taweel; Susan Shurin; Charles Weijer
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  10 in total

1.  Parents' perspectives on participating in genetic research in autism.

Authors:  Magan Trottier; Wendy Roberts; Irene Drmic; Stephen W Scherer; Rosanna Weksberg; Cheryl Cytrynbaum; David Chitayat; Cheryl Shuman; Fiona A Miller
Journal:  J Autism Dev Disord       Date:  2013-03

2.  Genetic counseling practice in next generation sequencing research: implications for the ethical oversight of the informed consent process.

Authors:  Nathalie Egalite; Iris Jaitovich Groisman; Beatrice Godard
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Mwenza Blell; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Lorraine Cowley; Stephanie O M Dyke; Clara Gaff; Robert Green; Alison Hall; Amber L Johns; Bartha M Knoppers; Stephanie Mulrine; Christine Patch; Eva Winkler; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Why parents consent to their children's participation in genetic research: A study of parental decision making.

Authors:  Sunita Kumari; Triptish Bhatia; Nagendra N Mishra; Nupur Kumari; Sreelatha S Narayanan; Deepak Malik; Smita N Deshpande
Journal:  Indian J Med Ethics       Date:  2019 Oct-Dec

5.  Preferences for Accessing Electronic Health Records for Research Purposes: Views of Parents Who Have a Child With a Known or Suspected Genetic Condition.

Authors:  Melissa Raspa; Ryan S Paquin; Derek S Brown; Sara Andrews; Anne Edwards; Rebecca Moultrie; Laura Wagner; MaryKate Frisch; Lauren Turner-Brown; Anne C Wheeler
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 5.725

6.  The disclosure of incidental genomic findings: an "ethically important moment" in pediatric research and practice.

Authors:  Martha Driessnack; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Nancy Downing; Alyson Hanish; Lisa L Shah; Mohammed Alasagheirin; Christian M Simon; Janet K Williams
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-04-10

Review 7.  Views on genomic research result delivery methods and informed consent: a review.

Authors:  Danya F Vears; Joel T Minion; Stephanie J Roberts; James Cummings; Mavis Machirori; Madeleine J Murtagh
Journal:  Per Med       Date:  2021-04-06       Impact factor: 2.512

8.  Consenting for current genetic research: is Canadian practice adequate?

Authors:  Iris Jaitovich Groisman; Nathalie Egalite; Beatrice Godard
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 9.  Ethical issues in genomics research on neurodevelopmental disorders: a critical interpretive review.

Authors:  S Mezinska; L Gallagher; M Verbrugge; E M Bunnik
Journal:  Hum Genomics       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 4.639

Review 10.  Use of next generation sequencing technologies in research and beyond: are participants with mental health disorders fully protected?

Authors:  Iris Jaitovich Groisman; Ghislaine Mathieu; Beatrice Godard
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2012-12-20       Impact factor: 2.652

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.