↓ Skip to main content

The Fiduciary Relationship Model for Managing Clinical Genomic “Incidental” Findings

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
The Fiduciary Relationship Model for Managing Clinical Genomic “Incidental” Findings
Published in
The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, January 2021
DOI 10.1111/jlme.12177
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriel Lázaro-Muñoz

Abstract

This paper examines how the application of legal fiduciary principles (e.g., physicians' duty of loyalty and care, duty to inform, and duty act within the scope of authority), can serve as a framework to promote management of clinical genomic "incidental" or secondary target findings that is patient-centered and consistent with recognized patient autonomy rights. The application of fiduciary principles to the clinical genomic testing context gives rise to at least four physician fiduciary duties in conflict with recent recommendations by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). These recommendations have generated much debate among lawyers, clinicians, and bioethicists hence I believe this publication will be of value and interest to your readership.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 17 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 24%
Social Sciences 6 12%
Arts and Humanities 5 10%
Philosophy 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 19 38%