Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18592399›Full record

ReviewMedicine, health care, and philosophy2009

Ethical aspects of genome diversity research: genome research into cultural diversity or cultural diversity in genome research?

Ilhan Ilkilic, Norbert W Paul

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ilhan IlkilicInstitute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. ilkilic@uni-mainz.de
Norbert W Paul

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The goal of the Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP) was to reconstruct the history of human evolution and the historical and geographical distribution of populations with the help of scientific research. Through this kind of research, the entire spectrum of genetic diversity to be found in the human species was to be explored with the hope of generating a better understanding of the history of humankind. An important part of this genome diversity research consists in taking blood and tissue samples from indigenous populations. For various reasons, it has not been possible to execute this project in the planned scope and form to date. Nevertheless, genomic diversity research addresses complex issues which prove to be highly relevant from the perspective of research ethics, transcultural medical ethics, and cultural philosophy. In the article at hand, we discuss these ethical issues as illustrated by the HGDP. This investigation focuses on the confrontation of culturally diverse images of humans and their cosmologies within the framework of genome diversity research and the ethical questions it raises. We argue that in addition to complex questions pertaining to research ethics such as informed consent and autonomy of probands, genome diversity research also has a cultural-philosophical, meta-ethical, and phenomenological dimension which must be taken into account in ethical discourses. Acknowledging this fact, we attempt to show the limits of current guidelines used in international genome diversity studies, following this up by a formulation of theses designed to facilitate an appropriate inquiry and ethical evaluation of intercultural dimensions of genome research.

Indexed as

Cultural DiversityEthics, MedicalPersonal AutonomyDatabases, Nucleic AcidEthics, ResearchEthnicityGenetic TestingHuman Genome ProjectHumansMoralsSocial Values

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.