Considerations of Autonomy in Guiding Decisions around the Feedback of Individual Genetic Research Results from Genomics Research: Expectations of and Preferences from Researchers in Botswana.
Mary Kasule, Mogomotsi Matshaba, Erisa Mwaka, Ambroise Wonkam, Jantina de Vries
{"title":"Considerations of Autonomy in Guiding Decisions around the Feedback of Individual Genetic Research Results from Genomics Research: Expectations of and Preferences from Researchers in Botswana.","authors":"Mary Kasule, Mogomotsi Matshaba, Erisa Mwaka, Ambroise Wonkam, Jantina de Vries","doi":"10.1155/2022/3245206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Human Health and Heredity (H3Africa) Consortium continues to generate large amounts of genomic data leading to new insights into health and disease among African populations. This has however generated debate among stakeholders involved in developing, implementing, and applying ethical standards and policies for the return of individual genetic research results. The key questions are about when results must, should, may, or must not be returned and by whom. This study aimed to explore the views on the feedback of individual pertinent and incidental genetic research results of researchers, ethics committee members, and policymakers in Botswana.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In-depth interviews were conducted with 16 key stakeholders from academic, research institutions, and regulatory bodies in Botswana. An analysis of the coded data was done through an iterative process of analytic induction to document and interpret themes and patterns.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, the study indicated that researchers have at least a partial obligation to return individual genetic research results to research participants. Respondents placed emphasis on the ethical principle of autonomy. They felt that it was inappropriate for researchers to make decisions about the return of results on participants' behalf except in situations of avoiding participant self-harm or harm to society.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings helped to highlight the importance of considering participants' autonomy in the development of sustainable and credible guidelines for feedback of findings from genomics research in Botswana, which can be explained during community engagement and consent processes. Such guidelines would ultimately be used to develop policies, guide African genomics research, and promote participant autonomy, transparency, and possibly participant trust in research.</p>","PeriodicalId":44052,"journal":{"name":"Global Health Epidemiology and Genomics","volume":"2022 ","pages":"3245206"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8989579/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health Epidemiology and Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3245206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Background: The Human Health and Heredity (H3Africa) Consortium continues to generate large amounts of genomic data leading to new insights into health and disease among African populations. This has however generated debate among stakeholders involved in developing, implementing, and applying ethical standards and policies for the return of individual genetic research results. The key questions are about when results must, should, may, or must not be returned and by whom. This study aimed to explore the views on the feedback of individual pertinent and incidental genetic research results of researchers, ethics committee members, and policymakers in Botswana.
Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with 16 key stakeholders from academic, research institutions, and regulatory bodies in Botswana. An analysis of the coded data was done through an iterative process of analytic induction to document and interpret themes and patterns.
Results: Overall, the study indicated that researchers have at least a partial obligation to return individual genetic research results to research participants. Respondents placed emphasis on the ethical principle of autonomy. They felt that it was inappropriate for researchers to make decisions about the return of results on participants' behalf except in situations of avoiding participant self-harm or harm to society.
Conclusion: Findings helped to highlight the importance of considering participants' autonomy in the development of sustainable and credible guidelines for feedback of findings from genomics research in Botswana, which can be explained during community engagement and consent processes. Such guidelines would ultimately be used to develop policies, guide African genomics research, and promote participant autonomy, transparency, and possibly participant trust in research.