ArticleJournal of community genetics2026
Public and patient involvement in developing a survey on re-consent for pediatric genomic data sharing in Japan: a GRIPP2-LF report.
Article in Journal of community genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn Japan, adolescents who entered genomic research under proxy consent are asked to re-consent at age 16 for newly collected data, while previously collected data remain usable without consent. Public perspectives on re-consent and data sharing are not well understood. To prepare a survey for adolescents, we used public and patient involvement (PPI) to refine the questionnaire and information sheet.
methodsFour stages of PPI were conducted: a kickoff meeting, two rounds of web-based feedback, and a final discussion. Five PPI members (aged 20-60 s, diverse backgrounds) provided iterative feedback on survey design, wording, and framing. All revisions were documented using GRIPP2-Long Form.
resultsPPI members expressed diverse views on re-consent and acceptable secondary data use, supporting the relevance of the survey design. Feedback resulted in major revisions, including clearer terminology, unified wording, improved explanations of parent-child context, existing versus newly collected data, age categorization, and Japan's opt-out procedures. Of 36 comments in the first round, 30 (83%) were incorporated; of 23 comments in the second round, 20 (87%) were incorporated.
conclusionPPI enhanced the clarity, cultural relevance, and acceptability of materials for a survey on re-consent in pediatric genomic data sharing. As one of the first systematic PPI reports from Japan, this work demonstrates how systematic involvement strengthens ethically sensitive research and provides a transparent foundation for forthcoming surveys.
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.