Taking aims seriously: repository research and limits on the duty to return individual research findings
- PMID:22402758
- PMCID: PMC3940279
- DOI: 10.1038/gim.2012.5
Taking aims seriously: repository research and limits on the duty to return individual research findings
Abstract
Most discussions of researchers' duties to return incidental findings or research results to research participants or repository contributors fail to provide an adequate theoretical grounding for such duties. Returning findings is a positive duty, a duty to help somebody. Typically, such duties are specified narrowly such that helping is only a duty when it poses little or no risk or burden to the helper and does not interfere with her legitimate aims. Under current budgetary and personnel constraints, and with currently available information technology, routine return of individual findings from research using repository materials would constitute a substantial burden on the scientific enterprise and would seriously frustrate the aims of both scientists and specimen/data contributors. In most cases, researchers' limited duties to help repository contributors probably can be fulfilled by some action less demanding than returning individual findings. Furthermore, the duty-to-return issue should be analyzed as a conflict between (possibly) helping some contributors now and (possibly) helping a greater number of people who would benefit in the future from the knowledge produced by research.
Conflict of interest statement
DISCLOSURE
The author declares no conflict of interest.
Similar articles
- Secondary researchers' duties to return incidental findings and individual research results: a partial-entrustment account.Richardson HS, Cho MK.Richardson HS, et al.Genet Med. 2012 Apr;14(4):467-72. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.12. Epub 2012 Feb 23.Genet Med. 2012.PMID:22361900
- A closer look revisited: are we subjects or are we donors?Fisher R.Fisher R.Genet Med. 2012 Apr;14(4):458-60. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.6. Epub 2012 Feb 23.Genet Med. 2012.PMID:22361901
- Return of research results from genomic biobanks: cost matters.Bledsoe MJ, Clayton EW, McGuire AL, Grizzle WE, O'Rourke PP, Zeps N.Bledsoe MJ, et al.Genet Med. 2013 Feb;15(2):103-5. doi: 10.1038/gim.2012.105. Epub 2012 Aug 30.Genet Med. 2013.PMID:22935716Free PMC article.No abstract available.
- Should genetic findings from genome research be reported back to the participants?Steinsbekk KS, Solberg B.Steinsbekk KS, et al.Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2012 Oct 16;132(19):2190-3. doi: 10.4045/tidsskr.12.0078.Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2012.PMID:23243670Review.English, Norwegian.
- Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations.Wolf SM, Lawrenz FP, Nelson CA, Kahn JP, Cho MK, Clayton EW, Fletcher JG, Georgieff MK, Hammerschmidt D, Hudson K, Illes J, Kapur V, Keane MA, Koenig BA, Leroy BS, McFarland EG, Paradise J, Parker LS, Terry SF, Van Ness B, Wilfond BS.Wolf SM, et al.J Law Med Ethics. 2008 Summer;36(2):219-48, 211. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2008.00266.x.J Law Med Ethics. 2008.PMID:18547191Free PMC article.Review.
Cited by
- To disclose, or not to disclose? Perspectives of clinical genomics professionals toward returning incidental findings from genomic research.AlFayyad I, Al-Tannir M, Abu-Shaheen A, AlGhamdi S.AlFayyad I, et al.BMC Med Ethics. 2021 Jul 27;22(1):101. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00670-y.BMC Med Ethics. 2021.PMID:34315465Free PMC article.
- Return of individual research results and incidental findings: facing the challenges of translational science.Wolf SM.Wolf SM.Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2013;14:557-77. doi: 10.1146/annurev-genom-091212-153506. Epub 2013 Jul 15.Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet. 2013.PMID:23875796Free PMC article.Review.
- Experiences and attitudes of genome investigators regarding return of individual genetic test results.Ramoni RB, McGuire AL, Robinson JO, Morley DS, Plon SE, Joffe S.Ramoni RB, et al.Genet Med. 2013 Nov;15(11):882-7. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.58. Epub 2013 May 2.Genet Med. 2013.PMID:23639901Free PMC article.
- Returning genetic research results: study type matters.McGuire AL, Robinson JO, Ramoni RB, Morley DS, Jofe S, Plon SE.McGuire AL, et al.Per Med. 2013 Jan;10(1):27-34. doi: 10.2217/pme.12.109.Per Med. 2013.PMID:24077424Free PMC article.
- Informed consent for next-generation nucleotide sequencing studies: Aiding communication between participants and investigators.Kost RG, Poppel SM, Coller BS.Kost RG, et al.J Clin Transl Sci. 2017 Apr;1(2):115-120. doi: 10.1017/cts.2016.21. Epub 2017 Feb 7.J Clin Transl Sci. 2017.PMID:28649453Free PMC article.
References
- Seinfeld: The Finale. [NBC television broadcast] transcript on file with the author. 1998http://www.seinfeldscripts.com/TheFinale.htm.
- Nuernberg Military Tribunals. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10: The Medical Case. Vols. I & II. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1946-1949.
- National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report: Ethical Prinicples and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Federal Register. 1979;44:23192–23197. - PubMed
- U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Federal Register. 1991;56:28003–28028. , as amended by Fed. Regist. 22005;28070(28120):36325-36328. Codified at 28045 CFR Part 28046. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Related information
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources