Literature DB >> 8254856

National policy development for the clinical application of genetic diagnostic technologies. Lessons from cystic fibrosis.

B S Wilfond1, K Nolan.   

Abstract

In recognition of the earlier experiences with genetic diagnostic services and in anticipation of a greater potential for genetic testing for presymptomatic disease and disease susceptibility, this article provides an analysis of policy development for cystic fibrosis carrier screening. The deficiencies of relying on an extemporaneous model for health policy development are described. Preferably, an evidentiary model, based on the evaluation of clinical research and incorporating professional and public attention to underlying normative issues, should define the standard of care. Appropriate procedural mechanisms should be established at both state and federal levels to prevent the unnecessary confusion, expense, and personal or social harms likely to result from a completely unrestrained application of developing genetic technologies or continuing ad hoc responses to rapid increases in genetic diagnostic capabilities. A broadly constituted national advisory commission on the ethical, legal, and social implications of the Human Genome Project would provide an important locus for national decision making and may offer an efficient mechanism for implementing the evidentiary model, promoting public involvement at a time when social policy decisions must be made to restructure the health care system to be more sensitive to issues of access, allocation, and costs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  American Society of Human Genetics; Analytical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; NCHGR Program on Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI); National Center for Human Genome Research; Office of Technology Assessment

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8254856

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  25 in total

1.  A public health response to emerging technology: expansion of the Massachusetts newborn screening program.

Authors:  K Atkinson; B Zuckerman; J M Sharfstein; D Levin; R J Blatt; H K Koh
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2001 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Commercial predictive testing: the desirability of one overseeing body.

Authors:  R Hoedemaekers
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Individual, family, and societal dimensions of genetic discrimination: a case study analysis.

Authors:  Lisa N Geller; Joseph S Alper; Paul R Billings; Carol I Barash; Jonathan Beckwith; Marvin R Natowicz
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.525

4.  Prenatal whole genome sequencing: just because we can, should we?

Authors:  Greer Donley; Sara Chandros Hull; Benjamin E Berkman
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 2.683

5.  Microarrays as a diagnostic tool in prenatal screening strategies: ethical reflection.

Authors:  Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Merryn V E Macville; Christine E M de Die-Smulders; Jan M M van Lith; Guido M W R de Wert
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 6.  Genetic research, adolescents, and informed consent.

Authors:  R F Weir; J R Horton
Journal:  Theor Med       Date:  1995-12

7.  Community engagement about genetic variation research.

Authors:  Sharon F Terry; Kurt D Christensen; Susan Metosky; Gayle Rudofsky; Kathleen P Deignan; Hulda Martinez; Penelope Johnson-Moore; Toby Citrin
Journal:  Popul Health Manag       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 2.459

8.  Evaluating randomized trials of screening.

Authors:  H G Welch; W C Black
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Public participation in medical policy-making and the status of consumer autonomy: the example of newborn-screening programs in the United States.

Authors:  E H Hiller; G Landenburger; M R Natowicz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 10.  Ethical and social implications of genetic testing for communication disorders.

Authors:  Kathleen S Arnos
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2008-03-25       Impact factor: 2.288

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.