The role of community review in evaluating the risks of human genetic variation research
- PMID: 10330360
- PMCID: PMC1377916
- DOI: 10.1086/302415
The role of community review in evaluating the risks of human genetic variation research
Abstract
The practicality and moral value of community review of human genetic research has become a focus of debate. Examples from two Native American communities are used to address four aspects of that debate: (1) the value of community review in larger, geographically dispersed populations; (2) the identification of culturally specific risks; (3) the potential conflict between individual and group assessments of research-related risks; and (4) the confusion of social categories with biological categories. Our experiences working with these two communities suggest that: (1) successful community review may require the involvement of private social units (e.g., families); (2) culturally specific implications of genetic research may be identifiable only by community members and are of valid concern in their moral universes; (3) community concerns can be incorporated into existing review mechanisms without necessarily giving communities the power to veto research proposals; and (4) the conflation of social and biological categories presents recruitment problems for genetic studies. These conclusions argue for the use of community review to identify and minimize research-related risks posed by genetic studies. Community review also can assist in facilitating participant recruitment and retention, as well as in developing partnerships between researchers and communities.
Similar articles
-
A model agreement for genetic research in socially identifiable populations.Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Sep;63(3):696-702. doi: 10.1086/302013. Am J Hum Genet. 1998. PMID: 9718343 Free PMC article.
-
Genetic screening of targeted subpopulations: the role of communal discourse in evaluating sociocultural implications.Genet Test. 1997-1998;1(4):269-74. doi: 10.1089/gte.1997.1.269. Genet Test. 1997. PMID: 10464656
-
Community engagement strategies for genomic studies in Africa: a review of the literature.BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Apr 12;16:24. doi: 10.1186/s12910-015-0014-z. BMC Med Ethics. 2015. PMID: 25889051 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Recruitment of New Immigrants Into a Randomized Controlled Prevention Trial: The Live Well Experience.J Prim Prev. 2018 Oct;39(5):453-468. doi: 10.1007/s10935-018-0519-6. J Prim Prev. 2018. PMID: 30128810
-
Palliative and end-of-life care in prisons: a content analysis of the literature.Int J Prison Health. 2014;10(3):172-97. doi: 10.1108/IJPH-05-2013-0024. Int J Prison Health. 2014. PMID: 25764177 Review.
Cited by
-
Are changes to the common rule necessary to address evolving areas of research? A case study focusing on the human microbiome project.J Law Med Ethics. 2013 Summer;41(2):454-69. doi: 10.1111/jlme.12055. J Law Med Ethics. 2013. PMID: 23802897 Free PMC article.
-
Strategies for consulting with the community: the cases of four large-scale genetic databases.Sci Eng Ethics. 2004 Jul;10(3):457-77. doi: 10.1007/s11948-004-0003-y. Sci Eng Ethics. 2004. PMID: 15362702
-
Promoting human subjects training for place-based communities and cultural groups in environmental research: curriculum approaches for graduate student/faculty training.Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Feb;21(1):209-26. doi: 10.1007/s11948-013-9508-6. Epub 2014 Jan 16. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015. PMID: 24430427
-
Ethical aspects of genome diversity research: genome research into cultural diversity or cultural diversity in genome research?Med Health Care Philos. 2009 Mar;12(1):25-34. doi: 10.1007/s11019-008-9147-x. Epub 2008 Jul 1. Med Health Care Philos. 2009. PMID: 18592399 Review.
-
Patient perspectives on group benefits and harms in genetic research.Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(3):135-42. doi: 10.1159/000317497. Epub 2010 Oct 8. Public Health Genomics. 2011. PMID: 20938159 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources