ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2014
Disclosure of genetic research results to members of a founder population.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- The return of individual genomic results to research participants: design and pilot study of Tohoku Medical Megabank Project.Journal of human genetics · 2022Article
- "If It Helps, It's Worth a Try": an Investigation of Perceptions and Attitudes about Genetic Counseling among Southern Manitoba Hutterites.Journal of genetic counseling · 2017Article
- Development of a diagnostic DNA chip to screen for 30 autosomal recessive disorders in the Hutterite population.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2016Article
- Copy number variants encompassing Mendelian disease genes in a large multigenerational family segregating bipolar disorder.BMC genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is currently extensive discussion and debate in the literature on how, when, and to whom genetic research results should be returned (see Genetics in Medicine, April 2012 issue). Here, we describe our experience in disclosing genetic information on Mendelian disorders discovered during the course of our research in the Hutterites. We first assessed attitudes toward the disclosure of carrier results, which revealed that many individuals wanted carrier information and that many intended to use the information in family planning. Based on this information, we developed a pilot study to test and disclose cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier status. Next, a larger scale project was developed in order to disclose genetic research results for 14 diseases to those interested in receiving the information. We developed brochures, offered a live interactive educational program, conducted a consent process, and disclosed results in letters mailed to the consented individuals. Overall, ~80% of individuals who participated in the educational program signed consent forms for the release of their results for 14 diseases. We describe our experience with returning individual genetic research results to participants in a population-based research study.
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.