ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2011
Opinions and intentions of parents of an autistic child toward genetic research results: two typical profiles.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Current global practice and implications for future research on disseminating health research results to study participants: A systematic review.PLoS medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Use of next generation sequencing technologies in research and beyond: are participants with mental health disorders fully protected?BMC medical ethics · 2012Pooled it
- Returning aggregate research results to participants: a scoping review of current practices, preferences and challenges.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Views on genomic research result delivery methods and informed consent: a review.Personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Ethical issues in genomics research on neurodevelopmental disorders: a critical interpretive review.Human genomics · 2021Review
- Preferences for Accessing Electronic Health Records for Research Purposes: Views of Parents Who Have a Child With a Known or Suspected Genetic Condition.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2020Article
- Consenting for current genetic research: is Canadian practice adequate?BMC medical ethics · 2014Article
- Genetic counseling practice in next generation sequencing research: implications for the ethical oversight of the informed consent process.Journal of genetic counseling · 2014Article
- The disclosure of incidental genomic findings: an "ethically important moment" in pediatric research and practice.Journal of community genetics · 2013Article
- Parents' perspectives on participating in genetic research in autism.Journal of autism and developmental disorders · 2013Article
- Why parents consent to their children's participation in genetic research: A study of parental decision making.Indian journal of medical ethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Returning results to research participants is increasingly acknowledged in research ethics guidelines. But few research teams actually do it or provide mechanisms for offering it as an option. We explored the perspective of parents of an autistic child participating in genetic research. In all, 388 questionnaires were sent to 194 parents; 158 questionnaires were completed (89 mothers and 69 fathers), giving a response rate of 41%. 97% of respondents (n=153) fully expressed a strong desire to receive research results, either general or individual ones. The survey solicited parents' opinions as to what means could be put in place to return research results. The majority held the research team responsible for returning individual results (79.7%, n=126). They indicated that it should occur at the completion of the research project (69%, n=109), by mail (75.3%, n=119). Over three quarters felt the Ministry of Health should cover the associated costs (77.8%, n=123). If the communication of individual findings, whether positive or negative, were to be possible, these would allow some respondents 'to be prepared for the future' (37%, n=57), without necessarily having practical benefits (21%, n=32), but at least bringing them 'relief or understanding' (14%, n=21). Moreover, parents were clear about the difference between research and clinical settings. This study underlines the importance of broadening the discussion about the communication of research results, especially individual ones. We believe that the integration of different perspectives--those of researchers, clinicians, ethics committees and participants--will enrich the debate and offer enlightenment for future ethical guidelines.
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.