Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23321621›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2013

Informed consent for whole-genome sequencing studies in the clinical setting. Proposed recommendations on essential content and process.

Carmen Ayuso, José M Millán, Marta Mancheño, Rafael Dal-Ré

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01927770 (Randomized Trial of Consent Interventions for NIH Whole Exome and Whole Genome Sequencing Studies), which is not on this map. Cited by 59 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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.

NCT01927770 completednot on this map

Randomized Trial of Consent Interventions for NIH Whole Exome and Whole Genome Sequencing Studies

TypeobservationalSponsorNational Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI)Ran2013 to 2021Enrolled212ConditionsWhole Genome Sequencing
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

59 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Is there a duty to recontact in light of new genetic technologies? A systematic review of the literature.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. WGS Data Collections: How Do Genomic Databases Transform Medicine?International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Information, communication, and cancer patients' trust in the physician: what challenges do we have to face in an era of precision cancer medicine?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Navigating the Intersection between Genomic Research and Clinical Practice.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2020
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Informed Consent in the Newly Established Biobank.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Carmen Ayuso1] Department of Genetics, IIS-Jimenez Diaz Foundation (IIS-FJD), Madrid, Spain [2] Centre for Biomedical Network Research on Rare Diseases CIBERER ISCIII, Valencia, Spain.
José M Millán
Marta Mancheño
Rafael Dal-Ré

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The development of new massive sequencing techniques has now made it possible to significantly reduce the time and costs of whole-genome sequencing (WGS). Although WGS will soon become a routine testing tool, new ethical issues have surfaced. In light of these concerns, a systematic review of papers published by expert authors on IC or specific ethical issues related to IC for WGS analysis in the clinical setting has been conducted using the Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. Additionally, a search was conducted for international ethical guidelines for genetic studies published by scientific societies and ethical boards. Based on these documents, a minimum set of information to be provided to patients in the IC form was determined. Fourteen and seven documents from the database search and from scientific societies, respectively, were selected. A very high level of consistency between them was found regarding the recommended IC form content. Pre-test counselling and general information common to all genetic tests should be included in the IC form for WGS for diagnostic purposes, but additional information addressing specific issues on WGS are proposed, such as a plan for the ethical, clinically oriented return of incidental findings. Moreover, storage of additional information for future use should also be agreed upon with the patient in advance. Recommendations for WGS studies in the clinical setting concerning both the elements of information and the process of obtaining the IC as well as how to handle the results obtained are proposed.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanInformed ConsentMental CompetencyGenetic TestingHumansSequence Analysis, DNAStandard of Care

Identifiers

PMID23321621
PMCPMC3778336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.