ArticleJournal of genetic counseling2015
Increasing participation in genomic research and biobanking through community-based capacity building.
Article in Journal of genetic counseling, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed.
- Community perspectives on the return of research results and ownership of data and specimens for brain tumor genomic research.SSM. Qualitative research in health · 2026Article
- Article
- Genetic research and the collective good: participants as leaders to reconcile individual and public interests.Journal of medical ethics · 2025Article
- Striving Towards Equity in Cardiovascular Genomics Research.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Key contextual factors involved with participation in medical and genomic screening and research for African American and White Americans: a qualitative inquiry.Journal of community genetics · 2024Article
- Capacity-Building for Stroke Genomic Research Data Collection: The African Neurobiobank Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Project Experience.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2023Article
- A conceptual analysis of public opinion regarding genome research in Japan.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Community Engagement in Precision Medicine Research: Organizational Practices and Their Impacts for Equity.AJOB empirical bioethics · 2023Article
- Beliefs and willingness towards participating in genetic testing for depression in low-income and racial/ethnic minority mothers at-risk.Archives of psychiatric nursing · 2022Article
- Amplifying Their Voices: Advice, Guidance, and Perceived Value of Cancer Biobanking Research Among an Older, Diverse Cohort.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022Article
- Learning from Black/African American Participants: Applying the Integrated Behavioral Model to Assess Recruitment Strategies for a Glaucoma Genetic Study.Health communication · 2022Article
- Community Stakeholders' Perspectives on Introducing Human Papillomavirus Vaccination and Biobanking Evidence-Based Programs Within Medically Underserved Communities: A Community-Engaged Approach.International quarterly of community health education · 2021Article
- Eliciting Willingness and Beliefs towards Participation in Genetic Psychiatric Testing in Black/African American Mothers at Risk for Depression.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Engaging community stakeholders in research on best practices for clinical genomic sequencing.Personalized medicine · 2020Article
- Predictors of genetic beliefs toward cancer risk perceptions among adults in the United States: Implications for prevention or early detection.Journal of genetic counseling · 2020Article
- Rights, interests and expectations: Indigenous perspectives on unrestricted access to genomic data.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2020Review
- Strategies for Genomic Medicine Education in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- A Review of African Americans' Beliefs and Attitudes About Genomic Studies: Opportunities for Message Design.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Review
- "I'm a Little More Trusting": Components of Trustworthiness in the Decision to Participate in Genomics Research for African Americans.Public health genomics · 2019Article
- The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium: Integrating Genomic Sequencing in Diverse and Medically Underserved Populations.American journal of human genetics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Achieving equitable minority representation in genomic biobanking is one of the most difficult challenges faced by researchers today. Capacity building--a framework for research that includes collaborations and on-going engagement--can be used to help researchers, clinicians and communities better understand the process, utility, and clinical application of genomic science. The purpose of this exploratory descriptive study was to examine factors that influence the decision to participate in genomic research, and identify essential components of capacity building with a community at risk of being under-represented in biobanks. Results of focus groups conducted in Central Harlem with 46 participants were analyzed by a collaborative team of community and academic investigators using content analysis and AtlisTi. Key themes identified were: (1) the potential contribution of biobanking to individual and community health, for example the effect of the environment on health, (2) the societal context of the science, such as DNA criminal databases and paternity testing, that may affect the decision to participate, and (3) the researchers' commitment to community health as an outcome of capacity building. These key factors can contribute to achieving equity in biobank participation, and guide genetic specialists in biobank planning and implementation.
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.