IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0154965.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Next Generation Sequencing on the Organization and Funding of Returning Research Results: Survey of Canadian Research Ethics Boards Members

Author

Listed:
  • Iris Jaitovich Groisman
  • Beatrice Godard

Abstract

Research Ethics Boards (REBs) are expected to evaluate protocols planning the use of Next Generation Sequencing technologies (NGS), assuring that any genomic finding will be properly managed. As Canadian REBs play a central role in the disclosure of such results, we deemed it important to examine the views and experience of REB members on the return of aggregated research results, individual research results (IRRs) and incidental findings (IFs) in current genomic research. With this intent, we carried out a web-based survey, which showed that 59.7% of respondents viewed the change from traditional sequencing to NGS as more than a technical substitution, and that 77% of respondents agreed on the importance of returning aggregated research results, the most compelling reasons being the recognition of participants’ contribution and increasing the awareness of scientific progress. As for IRRs specifically, 50% of respondents were in favour of conveying such information, even when they only indicated the probability that a condition may develop. Current regulations and risk to participants were considered equally important, and much more than financial costs, when considering the return of IRRs and IFs. Respondents indicated that the financial aspect of offering genetic counseling was the least important matter when assessing it as a requisite. Granting agencies were named as mainly responsible for funding, while the organizing and returning of IRRs and IFs belonged to researchers. However, views in these matters differ according to respondents’ experience. Our results draw attention to the need for improved guidance when considering the organizational and financial aspects of returning genetic research results, so as to better fulfill the ethical and moral principles that are to guide such undertakings.

Suggested Citation

  • Iris Jaitovich Groisman & Beatrice Godard, 2016. "Impact of Next Generation Sequencing on the Organization and Funding of Returning Research Results: Survey of Canadian Research Ethics Boards Members," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0154965
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154965
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154965
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0154965&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0154965?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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:plo:pone00:0154965. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.