Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35484929›Full record

ArticleThe New bioethics : a multidisciplinary journal of biotechnology and the body2023

Ethical Considerations in Research with Genomic Data.

Rachel Horton, Anneke Lucassen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The New bioethics : a multidisciplinary journal of biotechnology and the body, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. "ItResearch ethics · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Australian Attitudes Towards Waivers of Consent Within the Context of Genomic Data Sharing.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2024
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
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

2 authors.

Rachel HortonCentre for Personalised Medicine, St Anne's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6080-6354
Anneke LucassenCentre for Personalised Medicine, St Anne's College, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3324-4338

Funding

Wellcome Trust 208053Wellcome Trust 218092
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our ability to generate genomic data is currently well ahead of our ability to understand what they mean, raising challenges about how best to engage with them. This article considers ethical aspects of work with such data, focussing on research contexts that are intertwined with clinical care. We discuss the identifying nature of genomic data, the medical information intrinsic within them, and their linking of people within a biological family. We go on to consider what this means for consent, the importance of thoughtful sharing of genomic data, the challenge of constructing meaningful findings, and the legacy of unequal representation in genomic datasets. We argue that the ongoing success of genomic data research relies on public trust in the enterprise: to justify this trust, we need to ensure robust stewarding, and wide engagement about the ethical issues inherent in such practices.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchGenomicsHumansbioethicsdatadiversity‌ethicsGenomics

Identifiers

PMID35484929
PMCPMC7618432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.