研究人员对向研究参与者返还个体遗传学结果的看法:一项定性研究。

Q1 Arts and Humanities Global Bioethics Pub Date : 2021-03-09 DOI:10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453
Erisa Sabakaki Mwaka, Deborah Ekusai Sebatta, Joseph Ochieng, Ian Guyton Munabi, Godfrey Bagenda, Deborah Ainembabazi, David Kaawa-Mafigiri
{"title":"研究人员对向研究参与者返还个体遗传学结果的看法:一项定性研究。","authors":"Erisa Sabakaki Mwaka, Deborah Ekusai Sebatta, Joseph Ochieng, Ian Guyton Munabi, Godfrey Bagenda, Deborah Ainembabazi, David Kaawa-Mafigiri","doi":"10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Genetic results are usually not returned to research participants in Uganda despite their increased demand. We report on researchers' perceptions and experiences of return of individual genetic research results. The study involved 15 in-depth interviews of investigators involved in genetics and/or genomic research. A thematic approach was used to interpret the results. The four themes that emerged from the data were the need for return of individual results including incidental findings, community engagement and the consenting process, implications and challenges to return of individual results. While researchers are willing to return clinically significant genetic results to research participants, they remain unsure of how this should be implemented. Suggestions to aid implementation of return of results included reconsenting of participants before receiving individual genetic results and increasing access to genetic counseling services. Community engagement to determine community perceptions and individual preferences for the return of results, and also prepare participants to safely receive results emerged as another way to support return of results. Researchers have a positive attitude toward the return of clinically significant genetic results to research participants. There is need to develop national guidance on genetic research and also build capacity for clinical genetics and genetic counseling.</p>","PeriodicalId":36835,"journal":{"name":"Global Bioethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7952062/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Researchers' perspectives on return of individual genetics results to research participants: a qualitative study.\",\"authors\":\"Erisa Sabakaki Mwaka, Deborah Ekusai Sebatta, Joseph Ochieng, Ian Guyton Munabi, Godfrey Bagenda, Deborah Ainembabazi, David Kaawa-Mafigiri\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Genetic results are usually not returned to research participants in Uganda despite their increased demand. We report on researchers' perceptions and experiences of return of individual genetic research results. The study involved 15 in-depth interviews of investigators involved in genetics and/or genomic research. A thematic approach was used to interpret the results. The four themes that emerged from the data were the need for return of individual results including incidental findings, community engagement and the consenting process, implications and challenges to return of individual results. While researchers are willing to return clinically significant genetic results to research participants, they remain unsure of how this should be implemented. Suggestions to aid implementation of return of results included reconsenting of participants before receiving individual genetic results and increasing access to genetic counseling services. Community engagement to determine community perceptions and individual preferences for the return of results, and also prepare participants to safely receive results emerged as another way to support return of results. Researchers have a positive attitude toward the return of clinically significant genetic results to research participants. There is need to develop national guidance on genetic research and also build capacity for clinical genetics and genetic counseling.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Bioethics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7952062/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Bioethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在乌干达,尽管对基因研究结果的需求越来越大,但通常不会将其返还给研究参与者。我们报告了研究人员对归还个人基因研究结果的看法和经验。本研究对参与遗传学和/或基因组研究的研究人员进行了 15 次深入访谈。研究采用主题方法对结果进行解释。从数据中得出的四个主题是:归还个人结果(包括偶然发现)的必要性、社区参与和同意过程、归还个人结果的影响和挑战。虽然研究人员愿意将具有临床意义的基因结果返还给研究参与者,但他们仍不确定应如何实施。帮助实施结果返还的建议包括:在收到个人基因结果之前重新征询参与者的意见,以及增加获得基因咨询服务的机会。另一种支持结果返还的方法是让社区参与进来,以确定社区对结果返还的看法和个人偏好,并让参与者做好安全接收结果的准备。研究人员对向研究参与者返还具有临床意义的遗传结果持积极态度。有必要制定有关遗传研究的国家指南,并提高临床遗传学和遗传咨询的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Researchers' perspectives on return of individual genetics results to research participants: a qualitative study.

Genetic results are usually not returned to research participants in Uganda despite their increased demand. We report on researchers' perceptions and experiences of return of individual genetic research results. The study involved 15 in-depth interviews of investigators involved in genetics and/or genomic research. A thematic approach was used to interpret the results. The four themes that emerged from the data were the need for return of individual results including incidental findings, community engagement and the consenting process, implications and challenges to return of individual results. While researchers are willing to return clinically significant genetic results to research participants, they remain unsure of how this should be implemented. Suggestions to aid implementation of return of results included reconsenting of participants before receiving individual genetic results and increasing access to genetic counseling services. Community engagement to determine community perceptions and individual preferences for the return of results, and also prepare participants to safely receive results emerged as another way to support return of results. Researchers have a positive attitude toward the return of clinically significant genetic results to research participants. There is need to develop national guidance on genetic research and also build capacity for clinical genetics and genetic counseling.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Bioethics
Global Bioethics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
37 weeks
期刊最新文献
Can biosampling really be "non-invasive"? An examination of the socially invasive nature of physically non-invasive biosampling in urban and rural Malawi. The expressivist argument for recent policy changes regarding the provision of prenatal testing in Japan. A youth advisory group on health and health research in rural Cambodia. May Artificial Intelligence take health and sustainability on a honeymoon? Towards green technologies for multidimensional health and environmental justice. Broad consent for biobank research in South Africa - Towards an enabling ethico-legal framework
×
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