ArticleBMC nephrology2025
Research participants and stakeholders' views on feedback of genetic research findings: a qualitative study of the H3Africa Kidney Disease Research Network in Ghana.
Article in BMC nephrology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preferences of research participants with experience receiving individual results for future return of results.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is evidence that variants of the Apolipoprotein L1 gene in Africans and people of African descent increase the risk of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD). A study conducted by the H3Africa Kidney Disease Research Network showed that 28.2% of the Ghanaian study population carried 2 APOL1 high-risk variants. Relatives of patients with CKD may be at increased risk of developing CKD. Researchers of this project are faced with an ethical dilemma of whether, study participants and their relatives should be informed about their risk of developing CKD. The aim of this study was to investigate perspectives of research participants and other research stakeholders on returning individual genetic findings and aggregate results related to the kidney disease research at the Korle Bu Teaching Hospital in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana.
methodsThis study was conducted under the auspices of the H3Africa Community Engagement and Biobanking in Genomics collaborative project. An exploratory qualitative approach was employed utilising in-depth interviews, focus group discussions and deliberative workshops. Participants included genomic researchers, research participants, family members and members of the research ethics committee affiliated with the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital and the Ghana Health Service in Accra, Ghana. Thematic analysis was performed using NVivo qualitative analysis software (version 12) to examine perspectives on what results to return, who should receive these results and how they should be communicated.
resultsThere was consensus among the key stakeholders interviewed that both validated individual genetic results and aggregate results from the kidney disease research should be communicated to research participants and their relatives, as well as aggregate research results to communities. Most research participants expressed a preference for receiving individual genetic results through direct communication from a medical doctor or research scientist. Participants also suggested the use of traditional media to communicate aggregate results to broader communities.
conclusionThe study concludes that there are compelling reasons for communicating both individual and aggregate genetic research results related to kidney disease research with participants, their relatives and communities. More efforts should be invested in educating research participants, families and communities about the risks associated with the APOL1 risk variants prior to returning these results. Additionally, research teams should explore innovative communication strategies to support the feedback process and to promote public engagement in genetic and genomic research.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.