Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41988211›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society2025

Principles and Policy Recommendations for Comprehensive Genetic Data Governance.

Vivek Ramanan, Ria Vinod, Cole Williams, Sohini Ramachandran, Suresh Venkatasubramanian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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.

Vivek RamananBrown University.
Ria VinodBrown University.
Cole WilliamsBrown University.
Sohini RamachandranBrown University.
Suresh VenkatasubramanianBrown University.

Funding

Population-genetic methods for inferring recent histories and targets of selection in the biobank eraR35GM139628 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI Sohini Ramachandran · 2021 to 2026
$2.2M
Predoctoral Training Program in Biological Data Science at Brown UniversityT32GM128596 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI RAMACHANDRAN, SOHINI, SANDSTEDE, BJORN · 2018 to 2022
$1.5M
Predoctoral Training Program in Biological Data Science at Brown UniversityT32GM149433 · NIGMS · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI Emilia Huerta-Sanchez, Sohini Ramachandran · 2024 to 2026
$976k
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM139628NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM128596NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM149433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic data collection has become ubiquitous, producing genetic information about health, ancestry, and social traits. However, unregulated use-especially amid evolving scientific understanding-poses serious privacy and discrimination risks. These risks are intensified by advancing AI, particularly multi-modal systems integrating genetic, clinical, behavioral, and environmental data. In this work, we organize the uses of genetic data along four distinct 'pillars', and develop a risk assessment framework that identifies key values any governance system must preserve. In doing so, we draw on current privacy scholarship concerning contextual integrity, data relationality, and the Belmont principle. We apply the framework to four real-world case studies and identify critical gaps in existing regulatory frameworks and specific threats to privacy and personal liberties, particularly through genetic discrimination. Finally, we offer three policy recommendations for genetic data governance that safeguard individual rights in today's under-regulated ecosystem of large-scale genetic data collection and usage.

Identifiers

PMID41988211
PMCPMC13077651

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.