↓ Skip to main content

Feedback of Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants: Is It Feasible in Europe?

Overview of attention for article published in Biopreservation and Biobanking, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Feedback of Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants: Is It Feasible in Europe?
Published in
Biopreservation and Biobanking, April 2016
DOI 10.1089/bio.2015.0115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne, Deborah Mascalzoni, Sirpa Soini, Helena Machado, Jane Kaye, Heidi Beate Bentzen, Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag, Flavio D'Abramo, Michał Witt, Geneviève Schamps, Višnja Katić, Dusanca Krajnovic, Jennifer R. Harris, Working Group 1

Abstract

There is growing consensus that individual genetic research results that are scientifically robust, analytically valid, and clinically actionable should be offered to research participants. However, the general practice in European research projects is that results are usually not provided to research participants for many reasons. This article reports on the views of European experts and scholars who are members of the European COST Action CHIP ME IS1303 (Citizen's Health through public-private Initiatives: Public health, Market and Ethical perspectives) regarding challenges to the feedback of individual genetic results to research participants in Europe and potential strategies to address these challenges. A consultation of the COST Action members was conducted through an email survey and a workshop. The results from the consultation were analyzed following a conventional content analysis approach. Legal frameworks, professional guidelines, and financial, organizational, and human resources to support the feedback of results are largely missing in Europe. Necessary steps to facilitate the feedback process include clarifying legal requirements to the feedback of results, developing harmonized European best practices, promoting interdisciplinary and cross-institutional collaboration, designing educational programs and cost-efficient IT-based platforms, involving research ethics committees, and documenting the health benefits and risks of the feedback process. Coordinated efforts at pan-European level are needed to enable equitable, scientifically sound, and socially robust feedback of results to research participants.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Other 8 11%
Professor 5 7%
Other 16 23%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 15 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 9 13%