Cargando…
Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review
Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437022/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35705790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y |
_version_ | 1784781503213862912 |
---|---|
author | Tschigg, Katharina Consoli, Luca Biasiotto, Roberta Mascalzoni, Deborah |
author_facet | Tschigg, Katharina Consoli, Luca Biasiotto, Roberta Mascalzoni, Deborah |
author_sort | Tschigg, Katharina |
collection | PubMed |
description | Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and governance frameworks do not apply to all aspects of genotype-driven research approaches. The recall strategies disclose or withhold personal genotypic information with uncertain clinical utility. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to identify peculiar, explicit and implicit ethical, legal, and societal/social implications (ELSI) of RbG study designs. We conducted a systematic literature search of three electronic databases from November 2020 to February 2021. We investigated qualitative and quantitative research methods used to report ELSI aspects in RbG research. Congruent with other research findings, we identified a lack of qualitative research investigating the particular ELSI challenges with RbG. We included and analysed the content of twenty-five publications. We found a consensus on RbG posing significant ethical issues, dilemmas, barriers, concerns and societal challenges. However, we found that the approaches to disclosure and study-specific recall and communication strategies employed consent models and Return of Research Results (RoRR) policies varied considerably. Furthermore, we identified a high heterogeneity in perspectives of participants and experts about ELSI of study-specific RbG policies. Therefore, further fine-mapping through qualitative and empirical research is needed to draw conclusions and re-fine ELSI frameworks. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9437022 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer International Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94370222022-09-03 Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review Tschigg, Katharina Consoli, Luca Biasiotto, Roberta Mascalzoni, Deborah Eur J Hum Genet Review Article Recall by Genotype (RbG), Genotype-driven-recall (GDR), and Genotype-based-recall (GBR) strategies are increasingly used to conduct genomic or biobanking sub-studies that single out participants as eligible because of their specific individual genotypic information. However, existing regulatory and governance frameworks do not apply to all aspects of genotype-driven research approaches. The recall strategies disclose or withhold personal genotypic information with uncertain clinical utility. Accordingly, this scoping review aims to identify peculiar, explicit and implicit ethical, legal, and societal/social implications (ELSI) of RbG study designs. We conducted a systematic literature search of three electronic databases from November 2020 to February 2021. We investigated qualitative and quantitative research methods used to report ELSI aspects in RbG research. Congruent with other research findings, we identified a lack of qualitative research investigating the particular ELSI challenges with RbG. We included and analysed the content of twenty-five publications. We found a consensus on RbG posing significant ethical issues, dilemmas, barriers, concerns and societal challenges. However, we found that the approaches to disclosure and study-specific recall and communication strategies employed consent models and Return of Research Results (RoRR) policies varied considerably. Furthermore, we identified a high heterogeneity in perspectives of participants and experts about ELSI of study-specific RbG policies. Therefore, further fine-mapping through qualitative and empirical research is needed to draw conclusions and re-fine ELSI frameworks. Springer International Publishing 2022-06-15 2022-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9437022/ /pubmed/35705790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Review Article Tschigg, Katharina Consoli, Luca Biasiotto, Roberta Mascalzoni, Deborah Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title | Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title_full | Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title_fullStr | Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title_full_unstemmed | Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title_short | Ethical, legal and social/societal implications (ELSI) of recall-by-genotype (RbG) and genotype-driven-research (GDR) approaches: a scoping review |
title_sort | ethical, legal and social/societal implications (elsi) of recall-by-genotype (rbg) and genotype-driven-research (gdr) approaches: a scoping review |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9437022/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35705790 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41431-022-01120-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tschiggkatharina ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview AT consoliluca ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview AT biasiottoroberta ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview AT mascalzonideborah ethicallegalandsocialsocietalimplicationselsiofrecallbygenotyperbgandgenotypedrivenresearchgdrapproachesascopingreview |