ArticleBEOnline : journal of the West African bioethics training program2016
A Systematic Review of the Management of Incidental Findings in Genomic Research.
Article in BEOnline : journal of the West African bioethics training program, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Return of health research findings in Nigeria-perspective of potential research participants.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- Return of health research findings in Nigeria-perspective of potential research participants.Research square · 2025Article
- Incidental genomic findings in large scale research: using the "3-I framework" to reveal policy considerations.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Article
- GBA/GBN-position on the feedback of incidental findings in biobank-based research: consensus-based workflow for hospital-based biobanks.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
- Epistemic justice, African values and feedback of findings in African genomics research.Global bioethics = Problemi di bioetica · 2022Article
- Return of research results (RoRR) to the healthy CHRIS cohort: designing a policy with the participants.Journal of community genetics · 2021Article
- To disclose, or not to disclose? Perspectives of clinical genomics professionals toward returning incidental findings from genomic research.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Attitudes among South African university staff and students towards disclosing secondary genetic findings.Journal of community genetics · 2021Article
- Ubuntu philosophy and the consensus regarding incidental findings in genomic research: a heuristic approach.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2020Article
- How to use relevant data for maximal benefit with minimal risk: digital health data governance to protect vulnerable populations in low-income and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2019Review
- Responsibility, identity, and genomic sequencing: A comparison of published recommendations and patient perspectives on accepting or declining incidental findings.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Information empowerment has been the greatest gain of genomics, yet it also poses serious threat to its survival, especially when the information is incidental. There may be an emerging consensus that actionable incidental findings be returned. But this has not been supported by any systematic review. Future directions are equally missing. These are significant gaps. To fill these gaps, an online search on PubMed and Genetics in Medicine website was conducted between 20th of August to 23rd of October, 2013; combining certain filters and phrases, such as 'return incidental findings'. Nineteen (19) articles were selected from an avalanche of results, and reviewed. The review confirms a majority support for return of clinically actionable findings. The result also shows that the support represents views of Northern Americans. Critical contributions of Africans, Asians and Europeans are missing in this discourse. I recommended studies in this direction.
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.