Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Response to Open Peer Commentaries on “Disclosing Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants”: Defining Clinical Utility And Revisiting the Role of Relationships.Vardit Ravitsky & Benjamin S. Wilfond - 2006 - American Journal of Bioethics 6 (6):W10-W12.
    Investigators and institutional review boards should integrate plans about the appropriate disclosure of individual genetic results when designing research studies. The ethical principles of beneficence, respect, reciprocity, and justice provide justification for routinely offering certain results to research participants. We propose a result-evaluation approach that assesses the expected information and the context of the study in order to decide whether results should be offered. According to this approach, the analytic validity and the clinical utility of a specific result determine whether (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research.Juli Murphy, Joan Scott, David Kaufman, Gail Geller, Lisa LeRoy & Kathy Hudson - 2008 - American Journal of Bioethics 8 (11):36 – 43.
    The National Institutes of Health and other federal health agencies are considering establishing a national biobank to study the roles of genes and environment in human health. A preliminary public engagement study was conducted to assess public attitudes and concerns about the proposed biobank, including the expectations for return of individual research results. A total of 141 adults of different ages, incomes, genders, ethnicities, and races participated in 16 focus groups in six locations across the country. Focus group participants voiced (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   30 citations  
  • Strategies to Guide the Return of Genomic Research Findings: An Australian Perspective.Lisa Eckstein & Margaret Otlowski - 2018 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 15 (3):403-415.
    In Australia, along with many other countries, limited guidance or other support strategies are currently available to researchers, institutional research ethics committees, and others responsible for making decisions about whether to return genomic findings with potential value to participants or their blood relatives. This lack of guidance results in onerous decision-making burdens—traversing technical, interpretative, and ethical dimensions—as well as uncertainty and inconsistencies for research participants. This article draws on a recent targeted consultation conducted by the Australian National Health and Medical (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation