ArticlePersonalized medicine2013
Patient awareness and approval for an opt-out genomic biorepository.
Article in Personalized medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05277116 (The Electronic Medical Records and GEnomics), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
The Electronic Medical Records and GEnomics (eMERGE) Network Genomic Risk Assessment
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental opinions regarding an opt-out consent process for inpatient pediatric prospective observational research in the US.Pragmatic and observational research · 2017Article
- Improving the informed consent process in international collaborative rare disease research: effective consent for effective research.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Article
- A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on broad consent and data sharing in the United States.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
- The MICHR Genomic DNA BioLibrary: An Empirical Study of the Ethics of Biorepository Development.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2015Article
- Ethical and practical challenges to studying patients who opt out of large-scale biorepository research.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
aimIn this study, we sought to assess patient awareness and perceptions of an opt-out biorepository. MATERIALS &
methodsWe conducted exit interviews with adult patients and parents of pediatric patients having their blood drawn as part of their clinical care at Vanderbilt University Medical Center (TN, USA).
results32.9% of all patients and parents of pediatric patients report having heard of the opt-out biorepository, while 92.4% approve of this research effort based on a brief description. Awareness that leftover blood could be used for research increased among adult patients during the study period, from 34.3 to 50.0%.
conclusionThese findings will inform ongoing assessments of the suitability of opt-out and opt-in methods as alternatives to written informed consent for inclusion in a biorepository.
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.