Parental Perspectives Regarding the Return of Genomic Research Results in Neurodevelopmental Disorders in South Africa: Anticipated Impact and Preferences.

Angelique Diedericks, Zandré Bruwer, Nakita Laing, Emma Eastman, Jantina De Vries De Vries, Kirsten A Donald, Elise B Robinson, Charles R Newton, Amina Abubakar
{"title":"Parental Perspectives Regarding the Return of Genomic Research Results in Neurodevelopmental Disorders in South Africa: Anticipated Impact and Preferences.","authors":"Angelique Diedericks, Zandré Bruwer, Nakita Laing, Emma Eastman, Jantina De Vries De Vries, Kirsten A Donald, Elise B Robinson, Charles R Newton, Amina Abubakar","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4448155/v1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Few policies and little research exist regarding the disclosure of genomic results to research participants in Africa. As understanding participant preferences would be pivotal to the success of the feedback process, this study set out to address this issue by engaging with enrolled participants from an ongoing genomics research project on neurodevelopmental disorders with the aim to assess the anticipated impact of receiving pertinent results and explore the preferences for feedback in a South-African context. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 parents of children participating in the research study. Transcribed interview data and observational notes were analysed using thematic analysis and framework matrices. Participants linked their own meaning to the impact of receiving a pertinent result and perceived the information as useful for reasons other than only clinical utility. These included closure, improved management of their child's condition and information regarding recurrence risks. In terms of preferences for feedback, an in-person result delivery session, conducted by a member of the study team or medical professional familiar with their child was preferred. In addition, participants felt a sense of ownership over their blood or their contribution to the research study, finding meaning even in non-pertinent (secondary findings) or negative results. These findings provide insight into the type of discussions that may be valuable in enabling the development of best practices and guidelines for the return of individual genetic research results, in a culturally appropriate manner, within South-African communities.</p>","PeriodicalId":94282,"journal":{"name":"Research square","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11213179/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research square","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4448155/v1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Few policies and little research exist regarding the disclosure of genomic results to research participants in Africa. As understanding participant preferences would be pivotal to the success of the feedback process, this study set out to address this issue by engaging with enrolled participants from an ongoing genomics research project on neurodevelopmental disorders with the aim to assess the anticipated impact of receiving pertinent results and explore the preferences for feedback in a South-African context. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 parents of children participating in the research study. Transcribed interview data and observational notes were analysed using thematic analysis and framework matrices. Participants linked their own meaning to the impact of receiving a pertinent result and perceived the information as useful for reasons other than only clinical utility. These included closure, improved management of their child's condition and information regarding recurrence risks. In terms of preferences for feedback, an in-person result delivery session, conducted by a member of the study team or medical professional familiar with their child was preferred. In addition, participants felt a sense of ownership over their blood or their contribution to the research study, finding meaning even in non-pertinent (secondary findings) or negative results. These findings provide insight into the type of discussions that may be valuable in enabling the development of best practices and guidelines for the return of individual genetic research results, in a culturally appropriate manner, within South-African communities.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
南非家长对神经发育障碍基因组研究成果返还的看法:预期影响和偏好。
在非洲,关于向研究参与者披露基因组结果的政策很少,研究也不多。由于了解参与者的偏好对反馈过程的成功至关重要,本研究通过与正在进行的神经发育障碍基因组学研究项目的参与者接触来解决这一问题,目的是评估收到相关结果的预期影响,并探索在南非背景下对反馈的偏好。研究人员对 17 名参与研究的儿童家长进行了 12 次半结构式访谈。利用主题分析和框架矩阵对访谈数据和观察记录进行了分析。参与者将自己的意义与收到相关结果的影响联系起来,并认为这些信息除了临床实用性外,还有其他有用的原因。这些原因包括结案、改善对其子女病情的管理以及有关复发风险的信息。就反馈的偏好而言,由研究小组成员或熟悉其子女情况的医疗专业人员亲自进行结果传递是首选。此外,参与者对自己的血液或自己对研究的贡献有一种主人翁感,即使是非实质性结果(次要结果)或负面结果,他们也能从中找到意义。这些发现让我们深入了解了讨论的类型,这些讨论对于在南非社区内以文化适宜的方式制定返还个人基因研究结果的最佳实践和指南可能很有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Long non-coding RNA Malat1 fine-tunes bone homeostasis and repair by orchestrating cellular crosstalk and the β-catenin-OPG/Jagged1 pathway. Dietary lipid is largely deposited in skin and rapidly affects insulating properties. Novel Machine Learning of DNA Methylation Patterns to Diagnose Complex Disease: Identification of Cerebral Palsy with Concurrent Epilepsy. The context-dependent epigenetic and organogenesis programs determine 3D vs. 2D cellular fitness of MYC-driven murine liver cancer cells. GZMK+CD8+ T cells Target A Specific Acinar Cell Type in Sjögren's Disease.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1