Literature DB >> 22250019

Citizens' values regarding research with stored samples from newborn screening in Canada.

Yvonne Bombard1, Fiona A Miller, Robin Z Hayeems, June C Carroll, Denise Avard, Brenda J Wilson, Julian Little, Jessica P Bytautas, Judith Allanson, Renata Axler, Yves Giguere, Pranesh Chakraborty.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Newborn screening (NBS) programs may store bloodspot samples and use them for secondary purposes. Recent public controversies and lawsuits over storage and secondary uses underscore the need to engage the public on these issues. We explored Canadian values regarding storage and use of NBS samples for various purposes and the forms of parental choice for anonymous research with NBS samples.
METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods, public engagement study comprising 8 focus groups (n = 60), an educational component, deliberative discussion, and pre- and post-questionnaires assessing knowledge and values toward storage and parental choice.
RESULTS: Canadian citizens supported the storage of NBS samples for quality control, confirmatory diagnosis, and future anonymous research (>90%). There was broad support for use of NBS samples for anonymous research; however, opinions were split about the extent of parental decision-making. Support for a "routinized" approach rested on trust in authorities, lack of concern for harms, and an assertion that the population's interest took priority over the interests of individuals. Discomfort stemmed from distrust in authorities, concern for harms, and prioritizing individual interests, which supported more substantive parental choice. Consensus emerged regarding the need for greater transparency about the storage and secondary use of samples.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides novel insights into the values that underpin citizens' acceptance and discomfort with routine storage of NBS samples for research, and supports the need to develop well-designed methods of public education and civic discourse on the risks and benefits of the retention and secondary use of NBS samples.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22250019     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2011-2572

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  22 in total

1.  Public views on participating in newborn screening using genome sequencing.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Carolyn Barg; Celine Cressman; June C Carroll; Brenda J Wilson; Julian Little; Denise Avard; Michael Painter-Main; Judith Allanson; Yves Giguere; Pranesh Chakraborty
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Newborn screening: education, consent, and the residual blood spot. The position of the national society of genetic counselors.

Authors:  Carrie Blout; Cate Walsh Vockley; Amy Gaviglio; Michelle Fox; Brook Croke; Lori Williamson Dean
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Storage and use of Newborn Screening Blood Specimens for Research: Assessing Public Opinion in Illinois.

Authors:  Alexa Hart; Michael Petros; Joel Charrow; Claudia Nash; Catherine Wicklund
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Public concerns regarding the storage and secondary uses of residual newborn bloodspots: an analysis of print media, legal cases, and public engagement activities.

Authors:  Shannon Cunningham; Kieran C O'Doherty; Karine Sénécal; David Secko; Denise Avard
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-12-23

Review 5.  Retention and research use of residual newborn screening bloodspots.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; Aaron J Goldenberg; Erin Rothwell; Rebecca A Anderson; Michelle Huckaby Lewis
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2012-12-03       Impact factor: 7.124

6.  Sequencing Newborns: A Call for Nuanced Use of Genomic Technologies.

Authors:  Josephine Johnston; John D Lantos; Aaron Goldenberg; Flavia Chen; Erik Parens; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.683

7.  Impact of non-welfare interests on willingness to donate to biobanks: an experimental survey.

Authors:  Michele C Gornick; Kerry A Ryan; Scott Y H Kim
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2014-08-11       Impact factor: 1.742

8.  Education and parental involvement in decision-making about newborn screening: understanding goals to clarify content.

Authors:  Beth K Potter; Holly Etchegary; Stuart G Nicholls; Brenda J Wilson; Samantha M Craigie; Makda H Araia
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 9.  Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; John W Belmont; Jonathan S Berg; Benjamin E Berkman; Yvonne Bombard; Ingrid A Holm; Howard P Levy; Kelly E Ormond; Howard M Saal; Nancy B Spinner; Benjamin S Wilfond; Joseph D McInerney
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 11.025

10.  Citizens' perspectives on personalized medicine: a qualitative public deliberation study.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Julia Abelson; Dorina Simeonov; Francois-Pierre Gauvin
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 4.246

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.