Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37962912›Full record

ArticleAJOB empirical bioethics

Interrogating the Value of Return of Results for Diverse Populations: Perspectives from Precision Medicine Researchers.

Caitlin E McMahon, Nicole Foti, Melanie Jeske, William R Britton, Stephanie M Fullerton, Janet K Shim, Sandra Soo-Jin Lee

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. The rise of diversity terminology in biomedical research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Caitlin E McMahonDivision of Ethics, Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1621-7389
Nicole FotiDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Melanie JeskeInstitute on the Formation of Knowledge, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
William R BrittonVagelos College of Physicians & Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
Stephanie M FullertonDepartment of Bioethics & Humanities, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Janet K ShimDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Sandra Soo-Jin LeeDivision of Ethics, Department of Medical Humanities and Ethics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2312-9814
Cal Humanities · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USColumbia University · USUniversity of Chicago · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

Understanding the Expectations and Needs of Diverse Communities for Navigating Research ResultsR01HG010330 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LEE, SANDRA SOO-JIN, SHIM, JANET K · 2018 to 2021
$2.9M
ELSI Biennial CongressU13HG010830 · NHGRI · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CHO, MILDRED K., LEE, SANDRA SOO-JIN · 2019 to 2023
$728k
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG010330NHGRI NIH HHS U13 HG010830
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOver the last decade, the return of results (ROR) in precision medicine research (PMR) has become increasingly routine. Calls for individual rights to research results have extended the "duty to report" from clinically useful genetic information to traits and ancestry results. ROR has thus been reframed as inherently beneficial to research participants, without a needed focus on who benefits and how. This paper addresses this gap, particularly in the context of PMR aimed at increasing participant diversity, by providing investigator and researcher perspectives on and questions about the assumed value of ROR in PMR.

methodsSemi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of investigators and researchers across federally funded PMR studies in three national consortia, as well as observations of study activities, focused on how PM researchers conceptualize diversity and implement inclusive practices across research stages, including navigating ROR.

resultsInterviewees (1) validated the value of ROR as a benefit of PMR, while others (2) questioned the benefit of clinically actionable results to individuals in the absence of sufficient resources for translating findings into health care for diverse and disadvantaged populations; (3) expressed uncertainties in applying the presumed value of ROR as a benefit for

conclusionsConceptualizations of diversity and inclusion among PM researchers and investigators raise unique ethical questions where unexamined assumptions of the value of ROR inform study recruitment efforts to enroll minoritized and under-represented populations. A lack of consideration for resources and infrastructure necessary to translate ROR into actionable information may hinder trustworthy community-research relationships. Thus, we argue for a more intentional interrogation of ROR practices as an offer of benefit and for whom.

Indexed as

Precision MedicineResearch PersonnelBiomedical ResearchCultural DiversityDisclosureHumansQualitative ResearchResearch Subjectsdiversityhealth equityprecision medicinequalitative researchresearch participationReturn of results

Identifiers

PMID37962912
PMCPMC11090989
OpenAlexW4388656098

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.