自主性的考虑在指导决策周围的个人遗传研究结果的反馈基因组学研究:期望和偏好的研究人员在博茨瓦纳。

IF 1.1 Q4 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Health Epidemiology and Genomics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2022/3245206
Mary Kasule, Mogomotsi Matshaba, Erisa Mwaka, Ambroise Wonkam, Jantina de Vries
{"title":"自主性的考虑在指导决策周围的个人遗传研究结果的反馈基因组学研究:期望和偏好的研究人员在博茨瓦纳。","authors":"Mary Kasule,&nbsp;Mogomotsi Matshaba,&nbsp;Erisa Mwaka,&nbsp;Ambroise Wonkam,&nbsp;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":"{\"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,&nbsp;Mogomotsi Matshaba,&nbsp;Erisa Mwaka,&nbsp;Ambroise Wonkam,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

背景:人类健康和遗传(H3Africa)联盟继续产生大量基因组数据,从而对非洲人口的健康和疾病产生新的见解。然而,这在参与制定、实施和应用伦理标准和政策以回报个人基因研究成果的利益相关者之间引发了争论。关键问题是,什么时候必须、应该、可以或不应该归还结果,以及由谁归还。本研究旨在探讨博茨瓦纳研究人员、伦理委员会成员和政策制定者对个体相关和偶然遗传研究结果反馈的看法。方法:与来自博茨瓦纳学术、研究机构和监管机构的16名关键利益相关者进行了深入访谈。通过分析归纳的迭代过程对编码数据进行分析,以记录和解释主题和模式。结果:总的来说,这项研究表明,研究人员至少有部分义务将个人基因研究结果返还给研究参与者。受访者强调了自治的伦理原则。他们认为,除了在避免参与者自残或危害社会的情况下,研究人员代表参与者做出关于结果返回的决定是不合适的。结论:研究结果有助于强调在博茨瓦纳基因组学研究结果反馈的可持续和可信指导方针的制定中考虑参与者自主权的重要性,这可以在社区参与和同意过程中得到解释。这样的指导方针最终将用于制定政策、指导非洲基因组学研究、促进参与者的自主权、透明度以及可能的参与者对研究的信任。
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
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.

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.

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 Health Epidemiology and Genomics
Global Health Epidemiology and Genomics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Family History of Hypertension and Echocardiographic Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Hypertensive Nigerians. Magnitude of Neonatal Sepsis and Factors Associated with It among Neonates Admitted to the Intensive Care Units of Neonate in the Primary Hospital of Hawzen, Tigray, Ethiopia, 2020. Shisha Consumption and Presence of Cotinine in Saliva Samples among Students in Public Universities in Coastal Kenya. Regionalization of the Mortality Risk from Cardiomyopathy and Respiratory Diseases Based on the Maximum Entropy Model. Healthcare Providers' Adherence to COVID-19 Prevention and Control Practices in Health Records and Information Management, Ghana.
×
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