IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v26y1999i5p361-373.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Extending public consultation via the Internet: The experience of the UK Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing electronic consultation

Author

Listed:
  • Colin Finney

Abstract

In 1996, an electronic consultation was set up for the UK Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing on its draft code of practice on over-the-counter genetic testing. Although the general public was encouraged to make an input, media coverage was disappointing and all responses came from health care professionals. The chief benefit of electronic consultation is its cost-effectiveness. Opening up the consultation process may help to create awareness in the community of the constraints under which advisory committees work. Problematic issues remain to be resolved, such as the role and status of public input in a system predicated on expert advice. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Colin Finney, 1999. "Extending public consultation via the Internet: The experience of the UK Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing electronic consultation," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(5), pages 361-373, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:26:y:1999:i:5:p:361-373
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154399781782275
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:26:y:1999:i:5:p:361-373. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.