Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36949262›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2023

A practical checklist for return of results from genomic research in the European context.

Danya F Vears, Nina Hallowell, Heidi Beate Bentzen, Bridget Ellul, Therese Haugdahl Nøst, Angeliki Kerasidou, Shona M Kerr, Michaela Th Mayrhofer, Signe Mežinska, Elizabeth Ormondroyd and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Research ethics · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The complex genomics of single gene disorders.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2023
    Article
  9. 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

13 authors.

Danya F VearsBiomedical Ethics Research Group, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. danya.vears@mcri.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-6290-545X
Nina HallowellEthox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7RF, UK.
Heidi Beate BentzenCentre for Medical Ethics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8285-818X
Bridget EllulCentre for Molecular Medicine and Biobanking, University of Malta, Msida, Malta.ORCID 0000-0003-4146-0663
Therese Haugdahl NøstDepartment of Community Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, N-9037, Tromsø, Norway.
Angeliki KerasidouEthox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7RF, UK.
Shona M KerrMRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Cancer, University of Edinburgh, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, EH4 2XU, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4137-1495
Michaela Th MayrhoferBBMRI-ERIC, Neue Stiftingtalstrasse 2/B/6, 8010, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6932-0473
Signe MežinskaInstitute of Clinical and Preventive Medicine, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia.ORCID 0000-0002-3190-100X
Elizabeth OrmondroydRadcliffe Department of Medicine, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre United Kingdom, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9116-4064
Berge SolbergDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), Trondheim, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-6434-082X
Birgitte Wirum SandNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Legal department, Oslo, Norway.
Isabelle Budin-LjøsneDivision of Climate and Environmental Health, Department of Food Safety, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_U127592696Wellcome Trust 203132
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing number of European research projects return, or plan to return, individual genomic research results (IRR) to participants. While data access is a data subject's right under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and many legal and ethical guidelines allow or require participants to receive personal data generated in research, the practice of returning results is not straightforward and raises several practical and ethical issues. Existing guidelines focusing on return of IRR are mostly project-specific, only discuss which results to return, or were developed outside Europe. To address this gap, we analysed existing normative documents identified online using inductive content analysis. We used this analysis to develop a checklist of steps to assist European researchers considering whether to return IRR to participants. We then sought feedback on the checklist from an interdisciplinary panel of European experts (clinicians, clinical researchers, population-based researchers, biobank managers, ethicists, lawyers and policy makers) to refine the checklist. The checklist outlines seven major components researchers should consider when determining whether, and how, to return results to adult research participants: 1) Decide which results to return; 2) Develop a plan for return of results; 3) Obtain participant informed consent; 4) Collect and analyse data; 5) Confirm results; 6) Disclose research results; 7) Follow-up and monitor. Our checklist provides a clear outline of the steps European researchers can follow to develop ethical and sustainable result return pathways within their own research projects. Further legal analysis is required to ensure this checklist complies with relevant domestic laws.

Indexed as

ChecklistInformed ConsentEuropeGenomicsHumansSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID36949262
PMCPMC10250331

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.