Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7762571›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics1995

A survey of DNA diagnostic laboratories regarding DNA banking.

J E McEwen, P R Reilly

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 1995. 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
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J E McEwenEunice Kennedy Shriver Center for Mental Retardation, Division of Social Science, Ethics, and Law, Waltham, MA 02254, USA.
P R Reilly
Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center · US

Funding

PHS HHS MCJ-259151-02-0
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reports the findings of a survey of 148 academically based and commercial DNA diagnostic labs regarding DNA banking (defined as the storage of individual DNA samples in some form with identifiers for later retrieval). The population surveyed consisted of all laboratories listed with HELIX, a national directory of DNA diagnostic labs that includes a fairly comprehensive listing of clinical service labs as well as a large number of research labs. The survey was concerned primarily with the legal and ethical issues that the long-term storage of DNA may raise. The survey inquired into the respondents' policies and procedures concerning (1) the extent of DNA banking and of interest in developing DNA banking in academia and industry and (2) the degree to which DNA banks had developed written internal policies and/or a written depositor's agreement (a signed document defining the rights and obligations of the person from whom the sample was taken and the bank) designed to anticipate or prevent some of the ethical and legal problems that can arise from the long-term retention of DNA. Our research suggests that (1) the activity of DNA banking is growing, particularly in the academic setting, and (2) most academically based DNA banks lack written internal policies, written depositor's agreements, or other relevant documentation regarding important aspects of this activity.

Indexed as

Databases, Nucleic AcidDNABiological Specimen BanksClinical Laboratory TechniquesConsent FormsDisclosureDocumentationEthics, MedicalFederal GovernmentGenetic ResearchHumansLaboratoriesOrganizational PolicyPatient RightsQuality ControlResearch SubjectsDNAEmpirical ApproachGenetics and ReproductionNational Center for Human Genome Research

Identifiers

PMID7762571
PMCPMC1801090
OpenAlexW1516886137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.