Cargando…

Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves

PURPOSE: Proposals to return medically actionable secondary genetic findings (SFs) in the clinical and research settings have generated controversy regarding whether to solicit individuals’ preferences about their “right not to know” genetic information. This study contributes to the debate by surve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schupmann, Will, Miner, Skye A., Sullivan, Haley K., Glover, Jamie R., Hall, Janet E., Schurman, Shepherd H., Berkman, Benjamin E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8633056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34326490
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01271-1
_version_ 1784607869926113280
author Schupmann, Will
Miner, Skye A.
Sullivan, Haley K.
Glover, Jamie R.
Hall, Janet E.
Schurman, Shepherd H.
Berkman, Benjamin E.
author_facet Schupmann, Will
Miner, Skye A.
Sullivan, Haley K.
Glover, Jamie R.
Hall, Janet E.
Schurman, Shepherd H.
Berkman, Benjamin E.
author_sort Schupmann, Will
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Proposals to return medically actionable secondary genetic findings (SFs) in the clinical and research settings have generated controversy regarding whether to solicit individuals’ preferences about their “right not to know” genetic information. This study contributes to the debate by surveying research participants who have actively decided whether to accept or refuse SFs. METHODS: Participants were drawn from a large NIH environmental health study. Participants who had accepted SFs (n=148) or refused SFs (n=83) were given more detailed information about the types of SFs researchers could return and were given an opportunity to revise their original decision. RESULTS: 41/83 initial refusers (49.4%) opted to receive SFs following the informational intervention. Nearly 75% of these “reversible refusers” thought they had originally accepted SFs. The 50.6% of initial refusers who continued to refuse (“persistent refusers”) demonstrated high levels of understanding of which SFs would be returned post-intervention. The most prominent reason for refusing was concern about becoming worried or sad (43.8%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the need for a more robust informed consent process when soliciting research participants’ preferences about receiving SFs. We also suggest that our data support implementing a default practice of returning SFs without actively soliciting preferences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8633056
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86330562022-01-29 Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves Schupmann, Will Miner, Skye A. Sullivan, Haley K. Glover, Jamie R. Hall, Janet E. Schurman, Shepherd H. Berkman, Benjamin E. Genet Med Article PURPOSE: Proposals to return medically actionable secondary genetic findings (SFs) in the clinical and research settings have generated controversy regarding whether to solicit individuals’ preferences about their “right not to know” genetic information. This study contributes to the debate by surveying research participants who have actively decided whether to accept or refuse SFs. METHODS: Participants were drawn from a large NIH environmental health study. Participants who had accepted SFs (n=148) or refused SFs (n=83) were given more detailed information about the types of SFs researchers could return and were given an opportunity to revise their original decision. RESULTS: 41/83 initial refusers (49.4%) opted to receive SFs following the informational intervention. Nearly 75% of these “reversible refusers” thought they had originally accepted SFs. The 50.6% of initial refusers who continued to refuse (“persistent refusers”) demonstrated high levels of understanding of which SFs would be returned post-intervention. The most prominent reason for refusing was concern about becoming worried or sad (43.8%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the need for a more robust informed consent process when soliciting research participants’ preferences about receiving SFs. We also suggest that our data support implementing a default practice of returning SFs without actively soliciting preferences. 2021-07-29 2021-12 /pmc/articles/PMC8633056/ /pubmed/34326490 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01271-1 Text en http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#termsUsers 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
Schupmann, Will
Miner, Skye A.
Sullivan, Haley K.
Glover, Jamie R.
Hall, Janet E.
Schurman, Shepherd H.
Berkman, Benjamin E.
Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title_full Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title_fullStr Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title_full_unstemmed Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title_short Exploring the Motivations of Research Participants Who Chose Not to Learn Medically Actionable Secondary Genetic Findings about Themselves
title_sort exploring the motivations of research participants who chose not to learn medically actionable secondary genetic findings about themselves
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8633056/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34326490
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-021-01271-1
work_keys_str_mv AT schupmannwill exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT minerskyea exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT sullivanhaleyk exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT gloverjamier exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT halljanete exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT schurmanshepherdh exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves
AT berkmanbenjamine exploringthemotivationsofresearchparticipantswhochosenottolearnmedicallyactionablesecondarygeneticfindingsaboutthemselves