Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33972350›Full record

ArticleThe journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law2021

Ethics Challenges for Presenting Genetic Data in Forensic Settings.

William Connor Darby

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

William Connor DarbyDr. Darby is Health Sciences Clinical Assistant Professor and Director of the UCLA Forensic Psychiatry Fellowship Program in the Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, California. wdarby@mednet.ucla.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Advances in psychiatric science and technology such as genetic testing hold great promise in enhancing care in treatment settings and improving truth-telling in forensic settings. Despite this promise, these emerging technological advances present considerable ethics dilemmas to forensic practitioners because of risks related to coercing evaluees to consent to testing, and not adequately informing people of forensic risks associated with these tests, as well as important prejudicial effects (e.g., the significance of the tests being overvalued by the trier of fact and introducing racial and socioeconomic biases). Ethics theories from Stone, Appelbaum, Griffith, Norko, as well as Weinstock and Darby, are reviewed and applied to the specific challenge of presenting genetic data in parental rights termination proceedings. Dialectical principlism is utilized as a framework to analyze the competing duty considerations in these situations to help guide ethics-based decision-making for forensic experts in these scenarios.

Indexed as

Ethics, MedicalForensic PsychiatryForensic MedicineHumansbiasethicsgeneticsneuroimagingparental termination

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.