ArticleEnvironmental health perspectives2006
Privacy and ethics in pediatric environmental health research-part II: protecting families and communities.
Article in Environmental health perspectives, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethics in prevention science involving genetic testing.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2013Article
- Children and biobanks: a review of the ethical and legal discussion.Human genetics · 2011Review
- Attitudes of genetic counselors towards genetic susceptibility testing in children.Journal of genetic counseling · 2010Article
- An exploration of ethical issues in research in children's health and the environment.Environmental health perspectives · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn pediatric environmental health research, information about family members is often directly sought or indirectly obtained in the process of identifying child risk factors and helping to tease apart and identify interactions between genetic and environmental factors. However, federal regulations governing human subjects research do not directly address ethical issues associated with protections for family members who are not identified as the primary "research participant." Ethical concerns related to family consent and privacy become paramount as pediatric environmental health research increasingly turns to questions of gene-environment interactions.
objectivesIn this article I identify issues arising from and potential solutions for the privacy and informed consent challenges of pediatric environmental health research intended to adequately protect the rights and welfare of children, family members, and communities. DISCUSSION: I first discuss family members as secondary research participants and then the specific ethical challenges of longitudinal research on late-onset environmental effects and gene-environment interactions. I conclude with a discussion of the confidentiality and social risks of recruitment and data collection of research conducted within small or unique communities, ethnic minority populations, and low-income families.
conclusionsThe responsible conduct of pediatric environmental health research must be conceptualized as a goodness of fit between the specific research context and the unique characteristics of subjects and other family stakeholders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.