ArticleBioethics2026
"Irresponsible Not to Share Such Important Information": A Narrative of Responsibility That Underpins Familial Disclosure of Genetic Risk in Singapore.
Article in Bioethics, 2026. 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.
- 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Patients diagnosed with familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) are advised to disclose their diagnosis to at-risk relatives, as early knowledge of genetic risk allows relatives to manage their cholesterol levels. Debates in the bioethical literature regarding familial disclosure of genetic risk tend to revolve around rights: the right of the patient to autonomy and confidentiality, against the right of the family members to receive information that is clinically relevant or genetically shared. However, empirical studies found that patients' reasoning was frequently relational, suggesting a need to reexamine the values used in guidelines. This study aimed to examine patient values that affect the familial disclosure of familial hypercholesterolaemia. Twenty-one patients were interviewed. The results showed that patients' decisions were driven by two factors: beneficence and emotional proximity. As interview questions did not ask specifically about responsibility, it is noteworthy that various notions of obligations to others emerged unprompted. Patients perceived responsibilities based on the knowledge they held, and the nature of familial relationships; in particular, duties to vulnerable relatives. My results suggest that responsibilities, rather than rights, are a decisive moral issue that motivated patients' decisions.
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.