Literature DB >> 9279262

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

E H Hiller1, G Landenburger, M R Natowicz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: State newborn-screening programs collectively administer the largest genetic-testing initiative in the United States. We sought to assess public involvement in formulating and implementing medical policy in this important area of genetic medicine.
METHODS: We surveyed all state newborn-screening programs to ascertain the screening tests performed, the mechanisms and extent of public participation, parental access to information, and policies addressing parental consent or refusal of newborn screening. We also reviewed the laws and regulations of each state pertaining to newborn screening.
RESULTS: Only 26 of the 51 state newborn-screening programs reported having advisory committees that include consumer representation. Fifteen states reported having used institutional review boards, another venue for public input. The rights and roles of parents vary markedly among newborn-screening programs in terms of the type and availability of screening information as well as consent-refusal and follow-up policies.
CONCLUSIONS: There is clear potential for greater public participation in newborn-screening policy-making. Greater public participation would result in more representative policy-making and could enhance the quality of services provided by newborn-screening programs.

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction; Health Care and Public Health; Legal Approach

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9279262      PMCID: PMC1381087          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.87.8.1280

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  20 in total

1.  Preventing AIDS, targeting women.

Authors:  W Chavkin
Journal:  Health PAC Bull       Date:  1990

2.  Animal research bills threaten Polish science.

Authors:  Richard Stone
Journal:  Science       Date:  1995-07-21       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Screening and treatment of newborns.

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  Houst Law Rev       Date:  1992

4.  Technology policy and democracy.

Authors:  B M Casper
Journal:  Science       Date:  1976-10-01       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Sickle-cell programming--an imperiled promise.

Authors:  C F Whitten
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1973-02-08       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Mandatory PKU screening: the other side of the looking glass.

Authors:  G J Annas
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Parental rights, child welfare, and public health: the case of PKU screening.

Authors:  R R Faden; N A Holtzman; A J Chwalow
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 9.308

8.  Patients' participation in medical care: effects on blood sugar control and quality of life in diabetes.

Authors:  S Greenfield; S H Kaplan; J E Ware; E M Yano; H J Frank
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1988 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Patient perception of involvement in medical care: relationship to illness attitudes and outcomes.

Authors:  D S Brody; S M Miller; C E Lerman; D G Smith; G C Caputo
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1989 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Survey research guiding public policy making in Maryland: the case of Alzheimer's disease and related disorders.

Authors:  W Reichel; M S Franch; J Solon
Journal:  Exp Gerontol       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 4.032

View more
  19 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.  A seat at the table: membership in federal advisory committees evaluating public policy in genetics.

Authors:  C F Ard; M R Natowicz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Policy issues and stakeholder concerns regarding the storage and use of residual newborn dried blood samples for research.

Authors:  Erin Rothwell; Rebecca Anderson; Jeffrey Botkin
Journal:  Policy Polit Nurs Pract       Date:  2010-05-10

Review 4.  The potential contribution of decision aids to screening programmes.

Authors:  V Entwistle
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Health-care providers' views on pursuing reproductive benefit through newborn screening: the case of sickle cell disorders.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Brenda J Wilson; June C Carroll; Martha Paynter; Julian Little; Judith Allanson; Jessica P Bytautas; Pranesh Chakraborty
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  Community involvement in developing policies for genetic testing: assessing the interests and experiences of individuals affected by genetic conditions.

Authors:  Sarah E Gollust; Kira Apse; Barbara P Fuller; Paul Steven Miller; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 7.  Genetics and public health--evolution, or revolution?

Authors:  Jane L Halliday; Veronica R Collins; Mary Anne Aitken; Martin P M Richards; Craig A Olsson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Questioning the consensus: managing carrier status results generated by newborn screening.

Authors:  Fiona Alice Miller; Jason Scott Robert; Robin Z Hayeems
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-12-04       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 9.  Reconsidering reproductive benefit through newborn screening: a systematic review of guidelines on preconception, prenatal and newborn screening.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Denise Avard; Bartha M Knoppers
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-03-03       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Attitudes of healthcare professionals and parents regarding genetic testing for violent traits in childhood.

Authors:  E Campbell; L F Ross
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 2.903

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.