Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22676197›Full record

ArticlePharmacogenomics2012

Return of research results from pharmacogenomic versus disease susceptibility studies: what's drugs got to do with it?

Lynn G Dressler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacogenomics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Research ethics · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lynn G DresslerUniversity of North Carolina, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes & Policy, Institute of Pharmacogenomics & Individualized Therapy, 120 Mason Farm Rd, Genetic Medicine Building, Rm 1091, CB7361, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7361, USA. lynn_dressler@unc.edu
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Center for Genomics and SocietyP50HG004488 · NHGRI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HENDERSON, GAIL E · 2007 to 2017
$12.6M
NHGRI NIH HHS P50 HG004488
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the most controversial ethical issues in genomics research is the return of individual research results to research subjects. As new technologies, including whole-genome sequencing, provide an increased opportunity for researchers to find clinically relevant research results, the questions related to if, when and how individual research results should be returned become more central to the ethical conduct of genomic research. In the absence of federal guidance on this issue, many groups and individuals have developed recommendations and suggestions to address these questions. Most of these recommendations have focused on the return of individual results from disease susceptibility studies. However, in addition to predicting the development of disease, genomic research also includes predicting an individual's response to drugs, especially the risk of developing adverse events. This article evaluates and compares the return of individual research results from disease susceptibility studies versus pharmacogenomic studies.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanPharmacogeneticsBiomedical ResearchDisease SusceptibilityGenomicsHumansResearch SubjectsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID22676197
PMCPMC4539533
OpenAlexW2037177205

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.