ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2014
Return of genomic results to research participants: the floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between.
Article in American journal of human genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 246 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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.
The MedSeq Project Pilot Study: Integrating Whole Genome Sequencing Into the Practice of Clinical Medicine
Genetic Risk: Whether, When, and How to Tell Adolescents
Who cites it
246 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- International policies guiding the selection, analysis, and clinical management of secondary findings from genomic sequencing: A systematic review.American journal of human genetics · 2024Pooled it
- Attitudes and beliefs regarding race-targeted genetic testing of Black people: A systematic review.Journal of genetic counseling · 2023Pooled it
- Guideline for feedback of individual genetic research findings for genomics research in Africa.BMJ global health · 2022Guideline
- Stakeholder views on secondary findings in whole-genome and whole-exome sequencing: a systematic review of quantitative and qualitative studies.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2017Pooled it
- An electronic review of clinical outcomes after return of actionable genetic research results from a health system research biobank.European journal of medical genetics · 2025Trial
- Research participants' experiences with return of genetic research results and preferences for web-based alternatives.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2019Trial
- Communicating BRCA research results to patients enrolled in international clinical trials: lessons learnt from the AGO-OVAR 16 study.BMC medical ethics · 2016Trial
- Recommendations for return of secondary genomic findings in observational cohort studies.Nature genetics · 2026Review
- Reciprocity in research: Participant views on return of results in the WATCH-PD qualitative study.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2026Article
- A randomized study of digital versus genetic counselor return of actionable genetic research results to biobank participants (RESPECT3 study).BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Return of health research findings in Nigeria-perspective of potential research participants.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Return of results is important to heterogeneous research participants: A single-site survey.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Expanding access to genomic analysis and reporting in research studies: The GENYSIS research core.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Digital death and posthumous data: a glocal, relational perspective.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Outcomes from a Novel Approach to Studying Consumer Genetic Testing for Germline Cancer and Cardiovascular Risk.American journal of medical genetics. Part A · 2025Article
- Returning aggregate research results to participants: a scoping review of current practices, preferences and challenges.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Return of health research findings in Nigeria-perspective of potential research participants.Research square · 2025Article
- Returning Individual-Level Urgent or Emergent Research Results to Participants: The Project Baseline Health Study Experience.American journal of medicine open · 2025Article
- Researcher views on returning results from multi-omics data to research participants: insights from The Molecular Transducers of Physical Activity Consortium (MoTrPAC) Study.BMC medical ethics · 2025Article
- Religious factors predict support for genomic medicine more strongly than politics, education, or trust: A survey of 4,939 adults in the United States.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
186 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
Abstract
As more research studies incorporate next-generation sequencing (including whole-genome or whole-exome sequencing), investigators and institutional review boards face difficult questions regarding which genomic results to return to research participants and how. An American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics 2013 policy paper suggesting that pathogenic mutations in 56 specified genes should be returned in the clinical setting has raised the question of whether comparable recommendations should be considered in research settings. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) Consortium and the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network are multisite research programs that aim to develop practical strategies for addressing questions concerning the return of results in genomic research. CSER and eMERGE committees have identified areas of consensus regarding the return of genomic results to research participants. In most circumstances, if results meet an actionability threshold for return and the research participant has consented to return, genomic results, along with referral for appropriate clinical follow-up, should be offered to participants. However, participants have a right to decline the receipt of genomic results, even when doing so might be viewed as a threat to the participants' health. Research investigators should be prepared to return research results and incidental findings discovered in the course of their research and meeting an actionability threshold, but they have no ethical obligation to actively search for such results. These positions are consistent with the recognition that clinical research is distinct from medical care in both its aims and its guiding moral principles.
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.