Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24758583›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2014

Human genetic research, race, ethnicity and the labeling of populations: recommendations based on an interdisciplinary workshop in Japan.

Yasuko Takezawa, Kazuto Kato, Hiroki Oota, Timothy Caulfield, Akihiro Fujimoto, Shunwa Honda, Naoyuki Kamatani, Shoji Kawamura, Kohei Kawashima, Ryosuke Kimura and 10 more

Open access · goldAbstract readConference Proceedings
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2014. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Lung cancer health disparities.Carcinogenesis · 2018
    Review
  6. Review
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

20 authors at 16 institutions in 4 countries.

Yasuko TakezawaInstitute for Research in Humanities, Kyoto University, Yoshidahonmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan. yasuko@zinbun.kyoto-u.ac.jp.
Kazuto Kato
Hiroki Oota
Timothy Caulfield
Akihiro Fujimoto
Shunwa Honda
Naoyuki Kamatani
Shoji Kawamura
Kohei Kawashima
Ryosuke Kimura
Hiromi Matsumae
Ayako Saito
Patrick E Savage
Noriko Seguchi
Keiko Shimizu
Satoshi Terao
Yumi Yamaguchi-Kabata
Akira Yasukouchi
Minoru Yoneda
Katsushi Tokunaga
The University of Tokyo · JPKitasato University · JPKyushu University · JPInstitute of Philosophy, Sociology and Law · AMKobe University · JPKyoto University · JPMeiji Gakuin University · JPMusashi University · JPOkayama University of Science · JPOsaka University · JPRIKEN Center for Integrative Medical Sciences · JPStaGen (Japan) · JPThe Open University of Japan · JPTohoku Medical Megabank Organization · JPTokyo University of the Arts · JPUniversity of the Ryukyus · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA challenge in human genome research is how to describe the populations being studied. The use of improper and/or imprecise terms has the potential to both generate and reinforce prejudices and to diminish the clinical value of the research. The issue of population descriptors has not attracted enough academic attention outside North America and Europe. In January 2012, we held a two-day workshop, the first of its kind in Japan, to engage in interdisciplinary dialogue between scholars in the humanities, social sciences, medical sciences, and genetics to begin an ongoing discussion of the social and ethical issues associated with population descriptors. DISCUSSION: Through the interdisciplinary dialogue, we confirmed that the issue of race, ethnicity and genetic research has not been extensively discussed in certain Asian communities and other regions. We have found, for example, the continued use of the problematic term, "Mongoloid" or continental terms such as "European," "African," and "Asian," as population descriptors in genetic studies. We, therefore, introduce guidelines for reporting human genetic studies aimed at scientists and researchers in these regions.

conclusionWe need to anticipate the various potential social and ethical problems entailed in population descriptors. Scientists have a social responsibility to convey their research findings outside of their communities as accurately as possible, and to consider how the public may perceive and respond to the descriptors that appear in research papers and media articles.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchHuman Genome ProjectInterdisciplinary CommunicationEthnicityFemaleGenetic ResearchGuidelines as TopicHumansJapanMalePrejudiceRacial GroupsResearch PersonnelResearch ReportTerminology as Topic

Identifiers

PMID24758583
PMCPMC4018961
OpenAlexW2171703627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.