ReviewJournal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD2024
The Return of Biomarker Results in Research: Balancing Complexity, Precision, and Ethical Responsibility.
Review in Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Return of Research Results to Participants in Longitudinal Cohort Studies in Health Research: Findings From 24 Cohorts of the Amsterdam Cohort Hub.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Omics-driven strategies for identifying biomarkers in Alzheimer's disease.Metabolic brain disease · 2026Review
- Article
- Return of results is important to heterogeneous research participants: A single-site survey.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Preferences of research participants with experience receiving individual results for future return of results.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Disclosure of onset-predictive biomarker results to research participants at risk of genetic frontotemporal dementia: a European perspective.Alzheimer's research & therapy · 2025Review
- Recommended approaches to sharing individual research results in Alzheimer's disease research: A multidisciplinary expert Delphi consensus.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Moving from dementia risk disclosure to return of individual research results: a bioethics perspective.The lancet. Healthy longevity · 2025Article
- Genetic and biomarker disclosure process in a memory and aging study.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2025Article
- Amyloid PET disclosure in subjective cognitive decline: Patient experiences over time.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent research aimed at the discovery, integration, and communication of health outcome measures (or "biomarkers") in Alzheimer's disease has raised challenging questions related to whether, how and when results from these investigations should be disclosed to research participants. Reflecting the apparent heterogeneity of many neurodegenerative diseases, biomarker or other risk factor results are often probabilistic, interactive, multi-modal, and selective. Such characteristics make it very complex to summarize and communicate to clinicians, researchers, and research participants. Whereas the format and content of academic literature is well-managed by the peer-review process, reporting individualized results to participants involves complex, sensitive, and ethical considerations. This paper describes three key factors to consider in decisions about the return of results to research participants: complexity, precision, and responsibility. The paper also presents six practical recommendations for implementing meaningful and ethical communication with research participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.