ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2015
Flexible positions, managed hopes: the promissory bioeconomy of a whole genome sequencing cancer study.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03548779 (North Carolina Genomic Evaluation by Next-generation Exome Sequencing, 2), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 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.
North Carolina Genomic Evaluation by Next-generation Exome Sequencing, 2
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unsettling the treatment imperative? Chemotherapy decision-making in the wake of genomic techniques.Sociology of health & illness · 2023Article
- Accomplishing an adaptive clinical trial for cancer: Valuation practices and care work across the laboratory and the clinic.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2020Article
- Kernel Fusion Method for Detecting Cancer Subtypes via Selecting Relevant Expression Data.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- Psychological adaptation to diagnostic genomic sequencing results: The role of hope fulfillment.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2019Article
- Genomic research and the cancer clinic: uncertainty and expectations in professional accounts.New genetics and society · 2019Article
- "Possibly positive or certainly uncertain?": participants' responses to uncertain diagnostic results from exome sequencing.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2018Article
- Enrolling Genomics Research Participants through a Clinical Setting: the Impact of Existing Clinical Relationships on Informed Consent and Expectations for Return of Research Results.Journal of genetic counseling · 2018Article
- The nuanced negative: Meanings of a negative diagnostic result in clinical exome sequencing.Sociology of health & illness · 2016Article
- With great (participant) rights comes great (researcher) responsibility.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic research has rapidly expanded its scope and ambition over the past decade, promoted by both public and private sectors as having the potential to revolutionize clinical medicine. This promissory bioeconomy of genomic research and technology is generated by, and in turn generates, the hopes and expectations shared by investors, researchers and clinicians, patients, and the general public alike. Examinations of such bioeconomies have often focused on the public discourse, media representations, and capital investments that fuel these "regimes of hope," but also crucial are the more intimate contexts of small-scale medical research, and the private hopes, dreams, and disappointments of those involved. Here we examine one local site of production in a university-based clinical research project that sought to identify novel cancer predisposition genes through whole genome sequencing in individuals at high risk for cancer. In-depth interviews with 24 adults who donated samples to the study revealed an ability to shift flexibly between positioning themselves as research participants on the one hand, and as patients or as family members of patients, on the other. Similarly, interviews with members of the research team highlighted the dual nature of their positions as researchers and as clinicians. For both parties, this dual positioning shaped their investment in the project and valuing of its possible outcomes. In their narratives, all parties shifted between these different relational positions as they managed hopes and expectations for the research project. We suggest that this flexibility facilitated study implementation and participation in the face of potential and probable disappointment on one or more fronts, and acted as a key element in the resilience of this local promissory bioeconomy. We conclude that these multiple dimensions of relationality and positionality are inherent and essential in the creation of any complex economy, "bio" or otherwise.
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.