Literature DB >> 22352737

Researcher and institutional review board chair perspectives on incidental findings in genomic research.

Janet K Williams1, Sandra Daack-Hirsch, Martha Driessnack, Nancy Downing, Laura Shinkunas, Debra Brandt, Christian Simon.   

Abstract

AIMS: Genomic research can produce findings unrelated to a study's aims. The purpose of this study was to examine researcher and Institutional Review Board (IRB) chair perspectives on genomic incidental findings (GIFs).
METHODS: Nineteen genomic researchers and 34 IRB chairs from 42 institutions participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Researchers and chairs described GIFs within their respective roles. Few had direct experience with disclosure of GIFs. Researchers favored policies where a case by case determination regarding whether GIF disclosure would be offered after discovery, whereas IRB chairs preferred policies where procedures for disclosure would be determined prior to approval of the research.
CONCLUSIONS: Researcher and IRB chair perspectives on management of GIFs overlap, but each group provides a unique perspective on decisions regarding disclosure of GIFs in research. Engagement of both groups is essential in efforts to provide guidance for researchers and IRBs regarding disclosure of GIFs in research.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22352737      PMCID: PMC3378025          DOI: 10.1089/gtmb.2011.0248

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers        ISSN: 1945-0257


  17 in total

1.  Medical researchers' ancillary clinical care responsibilities.

Authors:  Leah Belsky; Henry S Richardson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-06-19

2.  Genomic research and incidental findings.

Authors:  Brian Van Ness
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.718

3.  Institutional review board approaches to the incidental findings problem.

Authors:  Moira A Keane
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.718

Review 4.  Disclosure of research results from cancer genomic studies: state of the science.

Authors:  Lynn G Dressler
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2009-06-23       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a national survey of professionals involved in human subjects protection.

Authors:  Amy A Lemke; Susan B Trinidad; Karen L Edwards; Helene Starks; Georgia L Wiesner
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 1.742

6.  Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Janet K Williams; Laura Shinkunas; Debra Brandt; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 7.  Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.

Authors:  Susan M Wolf; Frances P Lawrenz; Charles A Nelson; Jeffrey P Kahn; Mildred K Cho; Ellen Wright Clayton; Joel G Fletcher; Michael K Georgieff; Dale Hammerschmidt; Kathy Hudson; Judy Illes; Vivek Kapur; Moira A Keane; Barbara A Koenig; Bonnie S Leroy; Elizabeth G McFarland; Jordan Paradise; Lisa S Parker; Sharon F Terry; Brian Van Ness; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.718

8.  Understanding incidental findings in the context of genetics and genomics.

Authors:  Mildred K Cho
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 1.718

Review 9.  Ethical implications of the use of whole genome methods in medical research.

Authors:  Jane Kaye; Paula Boddington; Jantina de Vries; Naomi Hawkins; Karen Melham
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-11-04       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement.

Authors:  Timothy Caulfield; Amy L McGuire; Mildred Cho; Janet A Buchanan; Michael M Burgess; Ursula Danilczyk; Christina M Diaz; Kelly Fryer-Edwards; Shane K Green; Marc A Hodosh; Eric T Juengst; Jane Kaye; Laurence Kedes; Bartha Maria Knoppers; Trudo Lemmens; Eric M Meslin; Juli Murphy; Robert L Nussbaum; Margaret Otlowski; Daryl Pullman; Peter N Ray; Jeremy Sugarman; Michael Timmons
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2008-03-25       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  21 in total

1.  A closer look at the recommended criteria for disclosing genetic results: perspectives of medical genetic specialists, genomic researchers, and institutional review board chairs.

Authors:  Debra S Brandt; Laura Shinkunas; Stephen L Hillis; Sandra E Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack; Nancy R Downing; Megan F Liu; Lisa L Shah; Janet K Williams; Christian M Simon
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Canadian Research Ethics Board Leadership Attitudes to the Return of Genetic Research Results to Individuals and Their Families.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; P Pearl O'Rourke; Laura M Beskow
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.718

3.  Big Data Privacy in Biomedical Research.

Authors:  Shuang Wang; Luca Bonomi; Wenrui Dai; Feng Chen; Cynthia Cheung; Cinnamon S Bloss; Samuel Cheng; Xiaoqian Jiang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Big Data       Date:  2016-09-13

4.  Association of Researcher Characteristics with Views on Return of Incidental Findings from Genomic Research.

Authors:  Julia Wynn; Josue Martinez; Jimmy Duong; Yuan Zhang; Jo Phelan; Abby Fyer; Robert Klitzman; Paul S Appelbaum; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-01-17       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Informed consent and genomic incidental findings: IRB chair perspectives.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Janet K Williams; Laura Shinkunas; Debra Brandt; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Martha Driessnack
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.742

6.  Perspectives of psychiatric investigators and IRB chairs regarding benefits of psychiatric genetics research.

Authors:  Laura Weiss Roberts; Laura B Dunn; Jane Paik Kim; Maryam Rostami
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2018-09-15       Impact factor: 4.791

7.  'Information is information': a public perspective on incidental findings in clinical and research genome-based testing.

Authors:  S Daack-Hirsch; M Driessnack; A Hanish; V A Johnson; L L Shah; C M Simon; J K Williams
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-05-03       Impact factor: 4.438

8.  Incidental variants are critical for genomics.

Authors:  Leslie G Biesecker
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-05-02       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  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

10.  Processes and factors involved in decisions regarding return of incidental genomic findings in research.

Authors:  Robert Klitzman; Brigitte Buquez; Paul S Appelbaum; Abby Fyer; Wendy K Chung
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2013-09-26       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.