Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39292430›Full record

ArticleJournal of community genetics2024

Research participant perceptions of personal utility in disclosure of individual research results from genomic analysis.

Brenda Bogaert, Marie-Josée Crevier, Cindy Roth, Ralf J Jox, Gaia Barazzetti

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Brenda Bogaert *Institut des humanités en médecine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. brenda.bogaert@chuv.ch.
Marie-Josée Crevier *Unité de consentement à la recherche, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Cindy RothUnité de consentement à la recherche, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Ralf J JoxInstitut des humanités en médecine, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Gaia BarazzettiGaia Barazzetti, EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article elaborates research participant perspectives on the communication of individual research results from genomic analyses. While most analyses focus on how to communicate results from the perspectives of clinicians or researchers, there is insufficient data on user perspectives and how this information may be used, valued, and interpreted by patients and their families. The concept of personal utility, which considers factors related to quality of life, including on how information may impact the person's future decisions, has been shown to be particularly relevant to understand research participant perspectives and to move beyond clinical and analytic utility factors such as mortality and morbidity. This article draws from qualitative research of research participants awaiting genomic results in the case of sudden cardiac death. Our results show perspectives of personal utility in communication of genomic results, including cognitive, behavioral, and affective outcomes. Cognitive outcomes include gain of information, improved knowledge of etiology and inheritance characteristics, and curiosity for what might be found. Behavioral outcomes include being able to plan life decisions, while affective outcomes include various coping strategies used. We will also discuss the value of knowing negative results and incidental findings from the research participant's perspective. This contribution gives suggestions on best practices to guide genome analysis returns, including incorporating participant wishes on individualized communication at the consent stage; developing relational autonomy approaches; and engaging them throughout the research trajectory.

Indexed as

Genomic returnPatient engagementPersonal utilitySudden cardiac death

Identifiers

PMID39292430
PMCPMC11549069

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.