ArticleJournal of community genetics2016
Participant views on consent in cancer genetics research: preparing for the precision medicine era.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethical frameworks of informed consent in the age of pediatric precision medicine.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2024Article
- Patients' and professionals' views related to ethical issues in precision medicine: a mixed research synthesis.BMC medical ethics · 2021Review
- Researchers' perspectives on return of individual genetics results to research participants: a qualitative study.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2021Article
- Molecular Tumor Boards: Ethical Issues in the New Era of Data Medicine.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- A qualitative study of participants' views on re-consent in a longitudinal biobank.BMC medical ethics · 2017Article
- Noninvasive Prenatal DNA Testing: The Vanguard of Genomic Medicine.Annual review of medicine · 2017Review
- Consent2Share: an integrated broad consenting process for re-contacting potential study subjects.Journal of clinical and translational research · 2017Article
- Consent Issues in Genetic Research: Views of Research Participants.Public health genomics · 2016Article
- Participants' Role Expectations in Genetics Research and Re-consent: Revising the Theory and Methods of Mental Models Research Relating to Roles.Journal of health communication · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) has created considerable discussions about research participant issues including re-consent and how and when to incorporate the patient experience into clinical trials. Within the changing landscape of genetic and genomic research, the preferences of participants are lacking yet are needed to inform policy. With the growing use of biobanks intended to support studies, including the national research cohort proposed under the PMI, understanding participant preferences, including re-consent, is a pressing concern. The Participant Issues Project (PIP) addresses this gap, and here we present data on participant attitudes regarding re-consent and broad consent in research studies. PIP study participants came from the Northwest Cancer Genetics Registry and included cancer patients, relatives, and controls. Thirty telephone interviews were conducted and analyzed using content and thematic analysis. Results indicate that in some scenarios, re-consent is needed. Most participants agreed that re-consent was necessary when the study direction changed significantly or a child participant became an adult, but not if the genetic variant changed. Most participants' willingness to participate in research would not be affected if the researcher or institution profited or if a broad consent form were used. Participants emphasized re-consent to provide information and control of the use of their data, now relevant for tailored treatment, while also prioritizing research as important. In the era of precision medicine, it is essential that policy makers consider participant preferences with regard to use of their materials and that participants understand genetic and genomic research and its harms and benefits as well as what broad consent entails, including privacy and re-identification risks.
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.