ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics
A content analysis of the views of genetics professionals on race, ancestry, and genetics.
Article in AJOB empirical bioethics. 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.
- Integrating genetic ancestry into clinical care: Accuracy, utility, and stakeholder views.Journal of community genetics · 2026Article
- Autoencoders for genomic variation analysis.Genome research · 2026Article
- Science, Society, and Dismantling Racism.Health equity · 2023Article
- Recommendations on the use and reporting of race, ethnicity, and ancestry in genetic research: Experiences from the NHLBI TOPMed program.Cell genomics · 2022Article
- Considerations of Racism and Data Equity Among Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, And Pacific Islanders in the Context of COVID-19.Current epidemiology reports · 2022Review
- Confronting Racism in Environmental Health Sciences: Moving the Science Forward for Eliminating Racial Inequities.Environmental health perspectives · 2021Article
- Impacts of personal DNA ancestry testing.Journal of community genetics · 2021Article
- Clinical Genetics Lacks Standard Definitions and Protocols for the Collection and Use of Diversity Measures.American journal of human genetics · 2020Article
- Diversity, Profit, Control: An Empirical Study of Industry Employees' Views on Ethics in Private Sector Genomics.AJOB empirical bioethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past decade, the proliferation of genetic studies on human health and disease has reinvigorated debates about the appropriate role of race and ancestry in research and clinical care. Here we report on the responses of genetics professionals to a survey about their views on race, genetics, and ancestry across the domains of science, medicine, and society. Through a qualitative content analysis of free-text comments from 515 survey respondents, we identified key themes pertaining to multiple meanings of race, the use of race as a proxy for genetic ancestry, and the relevance of race and ancestry to health. Our findings suggest that for many genetics professionals the questions of what race is and what race means remain both professionally and personally contentious. Looking ahead as genomics is translated into the practice of precision medicine and as learning health care systems offer continued improvements in care through integrated research, we argue for nuanced considerations of both race and genetic ancestry across research and care settings.
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.