Cargando…

IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants

PURPOSE: Researchers’ obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings (GIFs) have been widely debated, but there has been little empirical study of IRBs’ engagement with this issue. METHODS: This article presents data from the first extensive (n=796) national survey of IRB professionals’ underst...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gliwa, Catherine, Yurkiewicz, Ilana R., Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani, Hull, Sara Chandros, Jones, Nathan, Berkman, Benjamin E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873456/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26583685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.149
_version_ 1782432882119147520
author Gliwa, Catherine
Yurkiewicz, Ilana R.
Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani
Hull, Sara Chandros
Jones, Nathan
Berkman, Benjamin E.
author_facet Gliwa, Catherine
Yurkiewicz, Ilana R.
Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani
Hull, Sara Chandros
Jones, Nathan
Berkman, Benjamin E.
author_sort Gliwa, Catherine
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Researchers’ obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings (GIFs) have been widely debated, but there has been little empirical study of IRBs’ engagement with this issue. METHODS: This article presents data from the first extensive (n=796) national survey of IRB professionals’ understanding of, experience with, and beliefs surrounding GIFs. RESULTS: Most respondents had dealt with questions about GIFs (74%), but only a minority (47%) felt prepared to address them. Although a majority believed that there is an obligation to disclose GIFs (78%) there is still not consensus about the supporting ethical principles. Respondents generally did not endorse the idea that researchers’ additional time and effort (7%) and lack of resources (29%) were valid reasons for diminishing a putative obligation. Most (96%) supported a right not to know, but this view became less pronounced (63%) when framed in terms of specific case studies. CONCLUSIONS: IRBs are actively engaged with GIFs, but have not yet reached consensus. Respondents were uncomfortable with arguments that could be used to limit an obligation to return GIFs. This could indicate that IRBs are providing some of the impetus for the trend towards returning GIFs, although questions remain about the relative contribution of other stakeholders.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4873456
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48734562016-07-08 IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants Gliwa, Catherine Yurkiewicz, Ilana R. Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani Hull, Sara Chandros Jones, Nathan Berkman, Benjamin E. Genet Med Article PURPOSE: Researchers’ obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings (GIFs) have been widely debated, but there has been little empirical study of IRBs’ engagement with this issue. METHODS: This article presents data from the first extensive (n=796) national survey of IRB professionals’ understanding of, experience with, and beliefs surrounding GIFs. RESULTS: Most respondents had dealt with questions about GIFs (74%), but only a minority (47%) felt prepared to address them. Although a majority believed that there is an obligation to disclose GIFs (78%) there is still not consensus about the supporting ethical principles. Respondents generally did not endorse the idea that researchers’ additional time and effort (7%) and lack of resources (29%) were valid reasons for diminishing a putative obligation. Most (96%) supported a right not to know, but this view became less pronounced (63%) when framed in terms of specific case studies. CONCLUSIONS: IRBs are actively engaged with GIFs, but have not yet reached consensus. Respondents were uncomfortable with arguments that could be used to limit an obligation to return GIFs. This could indicate that IRBs are providing some of the impetus for the trend towards returning GIFs, although questions remain about the relative contribution of other stakeholders. 2015-11-19 2016-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4873456/ /pubmed/26583685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.149 Text en http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use:http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms
spellingShingle Article
Gliwa, Catherine
Yurkiewicz, Ilana R.
Lehmann, Lisa Soleymani
Hull, Sara Chandros
Jones, Nathan
Berkman, Benjamin E.
IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title_full IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title_fullStr IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title_full_unstemmed IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title_short IRB perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
title_sort irb perspectives on obligations to disclose genetic incidental findings to research participants
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873456/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26583685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.149
work_keys_str_mv AT gliwacatherine irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants
AT yurkiewiczilanar irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants
AT lehmannlisasoleymani irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants
AT hullsarachandros irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants
AT jonesnathan irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants
AT berkmanbenjamine irbperspectivesonobligationstodisclosegeneticincidentalfindingstoresearchparticipants