We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Pediatric Professionals' Attitudes about Secondary Findings in Genomic Sequencing of Children.
Journal of Pediatrics 2015 May
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the attitudes of pediatric professionals towards the March 2013 statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics that whenever genomic sequencing is ordered, the laboratory must look for 56 genes known to be highly penetrant in high-risk groups, and these results must be reported to the clinician regardless of patient age or consent.
STUDY DESIGN: E-mail and postal survey sent to 332 members of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Section on Bioethics (SOB) (n=183), Section on Genetics and Birth Defects (n=148), and 1 member of both groups regarding the mandatory search and reporting of secondary findings from genomic sequencing performed on children.
RESULTS: Of 332 potential participants, 12 asked to be excluded and 181 partially or completely responded (181/320, or 56.6%). Two were subsequently excluded (179). More than 80% believed that patients and parents (guardians) should have the right to refuse to be informed of secondary findings. Only 34.7% of AAP SOB members supported the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics proposed mandatory search policy in contrast with 70.8% of Section of Genetics and Birth Defects members (P<.01). Approximately 30% of both groups thought that parents should not have access to information about adult-onset conditions in their children. AAP SOB members were less likely to support testing a child for parental benefit (34.5% vs 79.7%, P<.01).
CONCLUSIONS: There is broad consensus that parents should have the right to opt out of receiving secondary findings. There is no consensus about the ethics of justifying disclosure on the basis of parental benefit.
STUDY DESIGN: E-mail and postal survey sent to 332 members of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) Section on Bioethics (SOB) (n=183), Section on Genetics and Birth Defects (n=148), and 1 member of both groups regarding the mandatory search and reporting of secondary findings from genomic sequencing performed on children.
RESULTS: Of 332 potential participants, 12 asked to be excluded and 181 partially or completely responded (181/320, or 56.6%). Two were subsequently excluded (179). More than 80% believed that patients and parents (guardians) should have the right to refuse to be informed of secondary findings. Only 34.7% of AAP SOB members supported the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics proposed mandatory search policy in contrast with 70.8% of Section of Genetics and Birth Defects members (P<.01). Approximately 30% of both groups thought that parents should not have access to information about adult-onset conditions in their children. AAP SOB members were less likely to support testing a child for parental benefit (34.5% vs 79.7%, P<.01).
CONCLUSIONS: There is broad consensus that parents should have the right to opt out of receiving secondary findings. There is no consensus about the ethics of justifying disclosure on the basis of parental benefit.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app