ArticleAmerican journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics2019
Psychiatric genetics researchers' views on offering return of results to individual participants.
Article in American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Return of individual research results from genomic research: A systematic review of stakeholder perspectives.PloS one · 2021Pooled it
- Preferences of research participants with experience receiving individual results for future return of results.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Return of results is important to heterogeneous research participants: A single-site survey.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Ethical and social issues in prediction of risk of severe mental illness: a scoping review and thematic analysis.BMC psychiatry · 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
- Addressing the ethical and societal challenges posed by genome-wide association studies of behavioral and brain-related traits.Nature neuroscience · 2023Review
- A practical checklist for return of results from genomic research in the European context.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023Article
- Ethics of returning children's individual research findings: from principles to practice.European child & adolescent psychiatry · 2021Review
- Views on genomic research result delivery methods and informed consent: a review.Personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Avoiding "toxic knowledge": the importance of framing personalized risk information in clinical decision-making.Personalized medicine · 2021Article
- "It's all about delivery": researchers and health professionals' views on the moral challenges of accessing neurobiological information in the context of psychosis.BMC medical ethics · 2021Article
- Return of results in a global survey of psychiatric genetics researchers: practices, attitudes, and knowledge.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Perceptions of best practices for return of results in an international survey of psychiatric genetics researchers.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2021Article
- Article
- Genetic feedback for psychiatric conditions: Where are we now and where are we going.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2020Review
- International Society of Psychiatric Genetics Ethics Committee: Issues facing us.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2019Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the middle of growing consensus that genomics researchers should offer to return clinically valid, medically relevant, and medically actionable findings identified in the course of research, psychiatric genetics researchers face new challenges. As they uncover the genetic architecture of psychiatric disorders through genome-wide association studies and integrate whole genome and whole exome sequencing to their research, there is a pressing need for examining these researchers' views regarding the return of results (RoR) and the unique challenges for offering RoR from psychiatric genetics research. Based on qualitative interviews with 39 psychiatric genetics researchers from different countries operating at the forefront of their field, we provide an insider's view of researchers' practices regarding RoR and the most contentious issues in psychiatry researchers' decision-making around RoR, including what are the strongest ethical, scientific, and practical arguments for and against offering RoR from this research. Notably, findings suggest that psychiatric genetics researchers (85%) overwhelmingly favor offering RoR of at least some findings, but only 22% of researchers are returning results. Researchers identified a number of scientific and practical concerns about RoR, and about how to return results in a responsible way to patients diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder. Furthermore, findings help highlight areas for further discussion and resolution of conflicts in the practice of RoR in psychiatric genetics research. As the pace of discovery in psychiatric genetics continues to surge, resolution of these uncertainties gains greater urgency to avoid ethical pitfalls and to maximize the positive impact of RoR.
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.