The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Anticipate and Communicate: Ethical Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings in the Clinical, Research, and Direct-to-Consumer Contexts (December 2013 Report of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues)
Abstract
Genomic population research increases the possibility of finding genetic coding anomalies that are not the primary object of research but may have significance for the current and future medical care of research participants and progeny. The December 2013 Report of the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues (Anticipate and Communicate: Ethical Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings in the Clinical, Research, and Direct-to-Consumer Contexts (http://bioethics.gov/sites/default/files/FINALAnticipateCommunicate_PCSBI_0.pdf)) recommends that a researcher anticipate these findings and make a plan that addresses which findings will be communicated to research participants and how. Following these recommendations will be disruptive for both investigators and institutional review boards (IRBs) until the research community reaches consensus, or a mechanism for evolving consensus, on which results should be returned to research participants. A protocol-by-protocol approach, though laborious, makes sense for both investigators and IRBs as the research community thinks through the implications of genomic research. Epidemiologists will note that discussion of the return of results and the plan for communicating findings should be included in both the participant consent agreement and the research protocol submitted to the IRB.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Genome-wide association studies
Uffelmann, E., Huang, Q. Q., Munung, N. S., de Vries, J., Okada, Y., Martin, A. R., Martin, H. C., Lappalainen, T., & Posthuma, D. (2021) · Nature Reviews Methods Primers · doi:10.1038/s43586-021-00056-9 · Cited by 1,849
Kalia, S. S., Adelman, K., Bale, S. J., Chung, W. K., Eng, C., Evans, J. P., Herman, G. E., Hufnagel, S. B., Klein, T. E., Korf, B. R., et al. (2017) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2016.190 · Cited by 1,644
Genetic studies of quantitative MCI and AD phenotypes in ADNI: Progress, opportunities, and plans
Saykin, A. J., Shen, L., Yao, X., Kim, S., Nho, K., Risacher, S. L., Ramanan, V. K., Foroud, T. M., Faber, K. M., Sarwar, N., et al. (2015) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2015.05.009 · Cited by 306
Cascades of Care After Incidental Findings in a US National Survey of Physicians
Ganguli, I., Simpkin, A. L., Lupo, C., Weissman, A., Mainor, A. J., Orav, E. J., Rosenthal, M. B., Colla, C. H., & Sequist, T. D. (2019) · JAMA Network Open · doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.13325 · Cited by 187
Lost in translation: returning germline genetic results in genome-scale cancer research
Initiative, A. P. C. G., Johns, A. L., McKay, S. H., Humphris, J. L., Pinese, M., Chantrill, L. A., Mead, R. S., Tucker, K., Andrews, L., Goodwin, A., et al. (2017) · Genome Medicine · doi:10.1186/s13073-017-0430-4 · Cited by 79
Virani, A. H., & Longstaff, H. (2015) · Journal of Genetic Counseling · doi:10.1007/s10897-014-9781-9 · Cited by 28
Nonmalignant meningioma and vestibular schwannoma incidence trends in the United States, 2004–2017
Withrow, D. R., Devesa, S. S., Deapen, D., Petkov, V., Van Dyke, A. L., Adamo, M., Armstrong, T. S., Gilbert, M. R., & Linet, M. S. (2021) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.33553 · Cited by 26
Metadata
- Authors
- Weiner, C.
- Venue
- American Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-08-22
- Volume
- 180
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 562-564
- ISSN
- 0002-9262 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-6256
- OpenAlex
- W2171718922
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 46.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.