Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34229325›Full record

ArticlePublic health genomics2021

Practices and Attitudes toward Returning Genomic Research Results to Low-Resource Research Participants.

Megan B Raymond, Kayla E Cooper, Lisa S Parker, Vence L Bonham

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public health genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Views of adults living with sickle cell disease on the theoretical return of secondary genomic findings.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Megan B RaymondSocial and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Kayla E CooperSocial and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Lisa S ParkerUniversity of Pittsburgh, Center for Bioethics & Health Law, Human Genetics, Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Vence L BonhamSocial and Behavioral Research Branch, National Human Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

Funding

Insights into Sickle Cell Trait and Sickle Cell DiseaseZIAHG200394 · NHGRI · NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BONHAM, VENCE L · 2014 to 2025
$3.8M
Understanding the Relationships between Race, Ethnicity, Ancestry and GenomicsZIAHG200324 · NHGRI · NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BONHAM, VENCE L · 2009 to 2025
$3.5M
Examining the Equitable Integration of Genomics in Health Care and SocietyZIAHG200403 · NHGRI · NATIONAL HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI BONHAM, VENCE L · 2019 to 2025
$1.3M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA HG200324Intramural NIH HHS ZIA HG200394Intramural NIH HHS ZIA HG200403
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany research programs are challenged to accommodate low-resource research participants' (LRRP) ancillary care needs when returning genomic research results. We define LRRP as those who are low income, uninsured, underinsured, or facing barriers to act upon the results returned. This study evaluates current policies and practices surrounding return of results (RoR) to LRRP, as well as the attitudes of investigators toward providing ancillary care to LRRP.

methodsA semi-structured interview study was conducted with representatives of 35 genomic research programs nationwide. Eligible programs were returning, or planning to return, medically actionable genomic results to participants.

resultsThree content categories emerged from this study, including: (1) RoR structures, (2) barriers to RoR to LRRP, and (3) solutions to meet community and LRRP needs. Three major structures of RoR emerged: (1) RoR Embedded in Clinical Care, (2) RoR Independent of Clinical Care, and (3) Reliance on Clinical Partnerships to Facilitate RoR. Inadequacy of program resources to address the needs of LRRP was commonly considered a significant obstacle. The attitudes and views of informants regarding responsibility to provide ancillary care for LRRP receiving genomic results were highly varied. Some informants believed that genomic sequencing and testing was not a priority for LRRP because of other pressing issues in their lives, such as housing and food insecurity. Research programs differ regarding whether clinical and social support for LRRP is considered within the purview of the research team. Some programs instituted accommodations for LRRP, including social work referral and insurance enrollment assistance.

conclusionSupport to access downstream treatment is not readily available for LRRP in many genomic research programs. Development of best practices and policies for managing RoR to LRRP is needed.

Indexed as

GenomicsPovertyAttitudeHumansResearch PersonnelGenomicsHealth equityResearch ethicsReturn of resultsUnderserved communities

Identifiers

PMID34229325
PMCPMC8592386

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.