1932

Abstract

For more than 20 years, the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute has supported empirical and conceptual research to anticipate and address the ethical, legal, and social implications of genomics. As a component of the agency that funds much of the underlying science, the program has always been an experiment. The ever-expanding number of issues the program addresses and the relatively low level of commitment on the part of other funding agencies to support such research make setting priorities especially challenging. Program-supported studies have had a significant impact on the conduct of genomics research, the implementation of genomic medicine, and broader public policies. The program's influence is likely to grow as ELSI research, genomics research, and policy development activities become increasingly integrated. Achieving the benefits of increased integration while preserving the autonomy, objectivity, and intellectual independence of ELSI investigators presents ongoing challenges and new opportunities.

Keyword(s): bioethicsELSIpolicysociety
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-genom-090413-025327
2014-08-31
2024-06-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/genom/15/1/annurev-genom-090413-025327.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-genom-090413-025327&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Allyse M, Karkazis K, Lee SS, Tobin SL, Greely HT. 1.  et al. 2012. Informational risk, institutional review, and autonomy in the proposed changes to the common rule. IRB 34:17–19 [Google Scholar]
  2. Allyse M, Milner LC, Cho MK. 2.  2011. Ethics watch: the G.I. genome: ethical implications of genome sequencing in the military. Nat. Rev. Genet. 12:589 [Google Scholar]
  3. 3. Am. Coll. Med. Genet., Am. Coll. Obstet. Gynecol 2001. Preconception and Prenatal Carrier Screening for Cystic Fibrosis: Clinical and Laboratory Guidelines Washington, DC: Am. Coll. Med. Genet. and Am. Coll. Obstet. Gynecol. [Google Scholar]
  4. Anderlik MR, Rothstein MA. 4.  2002. DNA-based identity testing and the future of the family: a research agenda. Am. J. Law Med. 28:215–32 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderson RT, Press N, Tucker DC, Snively BM, Wenzel L. 5.  et al. 2005. Patient acceptability of genotypic testing for hemochromatosis in primary care. Genet. Med. 7:557–63 [Google Scholar]
  6. Andrews LB, Fullarton JE, Holtzman NA, Motulsky AG. 6.  1994. Assessing Genetic Risks: Implications for Health and Social Policy. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press [Google Scholar]
  7. 7.  Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. 569 U.S. 12–398 (2013) [Google Scholar]
  8. Austin MA, Hair MS, Fullerton SM. 8.  2012. Research guidelines in the era of large-scale collaborations: an analysis of genome-wide association study consortia. Am. J. Epidemiol. 175:962–69 [Google Scholar]
  9. Berg JW, Mehlman MJ, Rubin DB, Kodish E. 9.  2009. Making all the children above average: ethical and regulatory concerns for pediatricians in pediatric enhancement research. Clin. Pediatr. 48:472–80 [Google Scholar]
  10. Beskow LM, Burke W, Merz JF, Barr PA, Terry S. 10.  et al. 2001. Informed consent for population-based research involving genetics. JAMA 286:2315–21 [Google Scholar]
  11. Beskow LM, Friedman JY, Hardy NC, Lin L, Weinfurt KP. 11.  2010. Developing a simplified consent form for biobanking. PLoS ONE 5:e13302 [Google Scholar]
  12. Bloss CS, Schork NJ, Topol EJ. 12.  2011. Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. N. Engl. J. Med. 364:524–34 [Google Scholar]
  13. Botkin JR. 13.  1998. Ethical issues and practical problems in preimplantation genetic diagnosis. J. Law Med. Ethics 26:17–28 [Google Scholar]
  14. Botkin JR. 14.  2005. Research for newborn screening: developing a national framework. Pediatrics 116:862–71 [Google Scholar]
  15. Botkin JR, McMahon WM, Smith KR, Nash JE. 15.  1998. Privacy and confidentiality in the publication of pedigrees: a survey of investigators and biomedical journals. JAMA 279:1808–12 [Google Scholar]
  16. Brandt-Rauf SI, Brandt-Rauf E, Gershon R, Brandt-Rauf PW. 16.  2011. The differing perspectives of workers and occupational medicine physicians on the ethical, legal and social issues of genetic testing in the workplace. New Solut. 21:89–102 [Google Scholar]
  17. Burke W, Daly M, Garber J, Botkin J, Kahn MJ. 17.  et al. 1997. Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. II. BRCA1 and BRCA2. JAMA 277:997–1003 [Google Scholar]
  18. Burke W, Matheny Antommaria AH, Bennett R, Botkin J, Clayton EW. 18.  et al. 2013. Recommendations for returning genomic incidental findings? We need to talk. ! Genet. Med. 15:854–59 [Google Scholar]
  19. Burke W, Petersen G, Lynch P, Botkin J, Daly M. 19.  et al. 1997. Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. I. Hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer. JAMA 277:915–19 [Google Scholar]
  20. Callanan NP, Cheuvront BJ, Sorenson JR. 20.  1999. CF carrier testing in a high risk population: anxiety, risk perceptions, and reproductive plans of carrier by “non-carrier” couples. Genet. Med. 1:323–27 [Google Scholar]
  21. Callier SL. 21.  2012. Swabbing students: Should universities be allowed to facilitate educational DNA testing?. Am. J. Bioeth. 12:32–40 [Google Scholar]
  22. 22. Cent. Sci. Rev 2013. Societal and ethical issues in research [SEIR]. Stud. Sec., Cent. Sci. Rev., Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://public.csr.nih.gov/StudySections/IntegratedReviewGroups/PSEIRG/SEIR/Pages/default.aspx [Google Scholar]
  23. Cho MK, Tobin SL, Greely HT, McCormick J, Boyce A, Magnus D. 23.  2008. Strangers at the benchside: research ethics consultation. Am. J. Bioeth. 8:4–13 [Google Scholar]
  24. Clayton EW, Hannig VL, Pfotenhauer JP, Parker RA, Campbell PW III, Phillips JA III. 24.  1996. Lack of interest by nonpregnant couples in population-based cystic fibrosis carrier screening. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 58:617–27 [Google Scholar]
  25. Clayton EW, Steinberg KK, Khoury MJ, Thomson E, Andrews L. 25.  et al. 1995. Informed consent for genetic research on stored tissue samples. JAMA 274:1786–92 [Google Scholar]
  26. 26. Comm. Bioeth., Comm. Genet., Am. Coll. Med. Genet. Genomics Ethics Leg. Issues Comm 2013. Ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Pediatrics 131:620–22 [Google Scholar]
  27. 27. ELSI Assess. Panel 2008. ELSI Assessment Panel (EAP) report Rep., Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://www.genome.gov/Pages/About/NACHGR/EAPReportFinal.pdf [Google Scholar]
  28. 28. ELSI Res. Advis., ELSI Policy Plan. Group 2003. The role of ELSI research and policy activities in the NHGRI plan Rep., Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://www.genome.gov/10005516 [Google Scholar]
  29. 29. ELSI Res. Plan. Eval. Group 2000. A review and analysis of the Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) Research Programs at the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy Rep., Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://www.genome.gov/Pages/Research/DER/ELSI/erpeg_report.pdf [Google Scholar]
  30. Emanuel EJ. 30.  1998. The blossoming of bioethics at NIH. Kennedy Inst. Ethics J. 8:455–66 [Google Scholar]
  31. Emanuel EJ. 31.  2008. The NIH and bioethics: What should be done?. Acad. Med. 83:529–31 [Google Scholar]
  32. Evans BJ. 32.  2014. The First Amendment right to speak about the human genome. Univ. Pa. J. Const. Law 16:549–636 [Google Scholar]
  33. Faden RR, Tambor ES, Chase GA, Geller G, Hofman KJ, Holtzman NA. 33.  1994. Attitudes of physicians and genetics professionals toward cystic fibrosis carrier screening. Am. J. Med. Genet. 50:1–11 [Google Scholar]
  34. Foster MW, Sharp RR, Freeman WL, Chino M, Bernsten D, Carter TH. 34.  1999. The role of community review in evaluating the risks of human genetic variation research. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 64:1719–27 [Google Scholar]
  35. Fujimura JH, Rajagopalan R. 35.  2011. Different differences: the use of “genetic ancestry” versus race in biomedical human genetic research. Soc. Stud. Sci. 41:5–30 [Google Scholar]
  36. Fuller BP, Kahn MJ, Barr PA, Biesecker L, Crowley E. 36.  et al. 1999. Privacy in genetics research. Science 285:1359–61 [Google Scholar]
  37. Fullerton SM, Anderson NR, Guzauskas G, Freeman D, Fryer-Edwards K. 37.  2010. Meeting the governance challenges of next-generation biorepository research. Sci. Transl. Med. 2:15cm3 [Google Scholar]
  38. Garrett JR. 38.  2013. Reframing the ethical debate regarding incidental findings in genetic research. Am. J. Bioeth. 13:44–46 [Google Scholar]
  39. Gostin LO, Hodge JG. 39.  1999. Genetic privacy and the law: an end to genetics exceptionalism. Jurimetrics 40:21–58 [Google Scholar]
  40. 40. Green ED, Guyer MS, Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2011. Charting a course for genomic medicine from base pairs to bedside. Nature 470:204–13 [Google Scholar]
  41. Green RC, Berg JS, Berry GT, Biesecker LG, Dimmock DP. 41.  et al. 2012. Exploring concordance and discordance for return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing. Genet. Med. 14:405–10 [Google Scholar]
  42. Green RC, Berg JS, Grody WW, Kalia SS, Korf BR. 42.  et al. 2013. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet. Med. 15:565–74 [Google Scholar]
  43. Green RC, Roberts JS, Cupples LA, Relkin NR, Whitehouse PJ. 43.  et al. 2009. Disclosure of APOE genotype for risk of Alzheimer's disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 361:245–54 [Google Scholar]
  44. Green RM. 44.  1997. NHGRI's intramural ethics experiment. Kennedy Inst. Ethics J. 7:181–89 [Google Scholar]
  45. Hall MA, Rich SS. 45.  2000. Laws restricting health insurers' use of genetic information: impact on genetic discrimination. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 66:293–307 [Google Scholar]
  46. Hanna KE. 46.  1995. The Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Program of the National Center for Human Genome Research: a missed opportunity?. Society's Choices: Social and Ethical Decision Making in Biomedicine RE Bulger, EM Bobby, HV Fineberg 432–57 Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press [Google Scholar]
  47. Henry MR, Cho MK, Weaver MA, Merz JF. 47.  2002. DNA patenting and licensing. Science 297:1279 [Google Scholar]
  48. Holtzman NA, Watson MS. 48.  1999. Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States: final report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. J. Child Fam. Nurs. 2:388–90 [Google Scholar]
  49. Hudson KL, Rothenberg KH, Andrews LB, Kahn MJ, Collins FS. 49.  1995. Genetic discrimination and health insurance: an urgent need for reform. Science 270:391–93 [Google Scholar]
  50. James R, Starks H, Segrest VA, Burke W. 50.  2012. From leaky pipeline to irrigation system: minority education through the lens of community-based participatory research. Prog. Community Health Partnersh. 6:471–79 [Google Scholar]
  51. Juengst ET. 51.  1996. Self-critical federal science? The ethics experiment within the U.S. Human Genome Project. Soc. Philos. Policy 13:63–95 [Google Scholar]
  52. Kaufman DJ, Bollinger JM, Dvoskin RL, Scott JA. 52.  2012. Risky business: risk perception and the use of medical services among customers of DTC personal genetic testing. J. Genet. Couns. 21:413–22 [Google Scholar]
  53. Kaufman DJ, Murphy J, Scott J, Hudson K. 53.  2008. Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study. Genet. Med. 10:831–39 [Google Scholar]
  54. Kaufman DJ, Murphy-Bollinger J, Scott J, Hudson KL. 54.  2009. Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 85:643–54 [Google Scholar]
  55. Kelley M, Edwards K, Starks H, Fullerton SM, James R. 55.  et al. 2012. Values in translation: how asking the right questions can move translational science toward greater health impact. Clin. Transl. Sci. 5:445–51 [Google Scholar]
  56. Lee SS, Bolnick DA, Duster T, Ossorio P, Tallbear K. 56.  2009. The illusive gold standard in genetic ancestry testing. Science 325:38–39 [Google Scholar]
  57. Lee SS, Crawley L. 57.  2009. Research 2.0: social networking and direct-to-consumer (DTC) genomics. Am. J. Bioeth. 9:35–44 [Google Scholar]
  58. Ludman EJ, Fullerton SM, Spangler L, Trinidad SB, Fujii MM. 58.  et al. 2010. Glad you asked: participants' opinions of re-consent for dbGap data submission. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 5:9–16 [Google Scholar]
  59. Malin B, Loukides G, Benitez K, Clayton EW. 59.  2011. Identifiability in biobanks: models, measures, and mitigation strategies. Hum. Genet. 130:383–92 [Google Scholar]
  60. Marshall E. 60.  1996. The genome program's conscience. Science 274:488–90 [Google Scholar]
  61. McGuire AL. 61.  2008. Identifiability of DNA data: the need for consistent federal policy. Am. J. Bioeth. 8:75–76 [Google Scholar]
  62. McGuire AL, Achenbaum LS, Whitney SN, Slashinski MJ, Versalovic J. 62.  et al. 2012. Perspectives on human microbiome research ethics. J. Empir. Res. Hum. Res. Ethics 7:1–14 [Google Scholar]
  63. McGuire AL, Evans BJ, Caulfield T, Burke W. 63.  2010. Regulating direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Science 330:181–82 [Google Scholar]
  64. Mehlman MJ, Berg JW, Juengst ET, Kodish E. 64.  2011. Ethical and legal issues in enhancement research on human subjects. Camb. Q. Healthc. Ethics 20:30–45 [Google Scholar]
  65. Morrissey C, Walker RL. 65.  2012. Funding and forums for ELSI research: Who (or what) is setting the agenda?. AJOB Prim. Res. 3:51–60 [Google Scholar]
  66. 66. Natl. Cancer Inst. Off. Biorepos. Biospecim. Res 2011. NCI Best Practices for Biospecimen Resources. Bethesda, MD: Natl. Inst. Health http://biospecimens.cancer.gov/bestpractices/2011-NCIBestPractices.pdf [Google Scholar]
  67. 67. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2011. ELSI research priorities and possible research topics. http://www.genome.gov/27543732 [Google Scholar]
  68. 68. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2012. Centers of Excellence in ELSI Research (CEER). http://www.genome.gov/15014773 [Google Scholar]
  69. 69. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2012. Division of Extramural Operations. http://www.genome.gov/27550081 [Google Scholar]
  70. 70. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2012. Division of Policy, Communications, and Education. http://www.genome.gov/10001084 [Google Scholar]
  71. 71. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2012. NHGRI Genomics and Society Working Group. http://www.genome.gov/27551917 [Google Scholar]
  72. 72. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2012. Social and Behavioral Research Branch. http://www.genome.gov/11508935 [Google Scholar]
  73. 73. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. Centers for Excellence in ELSI Research (CEER) awarded grants. http://www.genome.gov/25522195 [Google Scholar]
  74. 74. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER). http://www.genome.gov/27546194 [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. Education and Community Involvement Branch http://www.genome.gov/11008538 [Google Scholar]
  76. 76. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network. http://www.genome.gov/27540473 [Google Scholar]
  77. 77. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. ELSI publications and products. http://www.genome.gov/17515635 [Google Scholar]
  78. 78. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. ELSI Research Program Abstracts and Activities Database. http://www.genome.gov/17515632 [Google Scholar]
  79. 79. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. National Advisory Council for Human Genome Research. http://www.genome.gov/10000905 [Google Scholar]
  80. 80. Natl. Hum. Genome Res. Inst 2013. National Human Genome Research Institute organization. http://www.genome.gov/10000968 [Google Scholar]
  81. 81. Natl. Inst. Health 2001. Environmental justice: partnerships to address ethical challenges in environmental health. Req. Appl. RFA-ES-02-005, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/rfa-es-02-005.html [Google Scholar]
  82. 82. Natl. Inst. Health 2007. Social and cultural dimensions of health (R01). Program Announc. PA-07-045, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-07-045.html [Google Scholar]
  83. 83. Natl. Inst. Health 2009. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA) for individual postdoctoral fellows (F32). Program Announc. PA-09-210, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-09-210.html [Google Scholar]
  84. 84. Natl. Inst. Health 2009. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards (NRSA) for individual senior fellows (F33). Program Announc. PA-09-211, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-09-211.html [Google Scholar]
  85. 85. Natl. Inst. Health 2009. Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Awards for individual predoctoral fellowships (F31) to promote diversity in health-related research. Program Announc. PA-09-209, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-09-209.html [Google Scholar]
  86. 86. Natl. Inst. Health 2010. Clinical sequencing exploratory research (U01). Req. Appl. RFA-HG-10-017, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HG-10-017.html [Google Scholar]
  87. 87. Natl. Inst. Health 2010. The Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network, phase II—study investigators (U01). Req. Appl. RFA-HG-10-009, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants2.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HG-10-009.html [Google Scholar]
  88. 88. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Ethical legal and social implications (ELSI) of genomic research regular research program (R01) Program Announc. PA-11-250, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-250.html [Google Scholar]
  89. 89. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of genomic research exploratory/developmental research grant award (R21) Program Announc. PA-11-251, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-251.html [Google Scholar]
  90. 90. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of genomic research small research grant program (R03) Program Announc. PA-11-249, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-249.html [Google Scholar]
  91. 91. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Mentored research scientist development award (parent K01). Program Announc. PA-11-190, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-190.html [Google Scholar]
  92. 92. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. NIH pathway to independence award (parent K99/R00) Program Announc. PA-11-197, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-197.html [Google Scholar]
  93. 93. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Policy for sharing of data obtained in NIH supported or conducted genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Not. NOT-OD-07-088, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-07-088.html [Google Scholar]
  94. 94. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Research on ethical issues in biomedical, social, and behavioral research (R01). Program Announc. PA-11-180, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-180.html [Google Scholar]
  95. 95. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Research on ethical issues in biomedical, social, and behavioral research (R03). Program Announc. PA-11-181, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-181.html [Google Scholar]
  96. 96. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Research on ethical issues in biomedical, social, and behavioral research (R21). Program Announc. PA-11-182, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-11-182.html [Google Scholar]
  97. 97. Natl. Inst. Health 2011. Scientific meetings for creating interdisciplinary research teams in basic behavioral and social science research (R13). Req. Appl. RFA-CA-10-017, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-CA-10-017.html [Google Scholar]
  98. 98. Natl. Inst. Health 2012. Clinical sequencing exploratory research (UM1). Req. Appl. RFA-HG-12-009, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HG-12-009.html [Google Scholar]
  99. 99. Natl. Inst. Health 2012. International research ethics education and curriculum development award (R25). Program Announc. PAR-13-027, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-13-027.html [Google Scholar]
  100. 100. Natl. Inst. Health 2012. NIH support for conferences and scientific meetings (parent R13/U13) Program Announc. PA-12-212, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-12-212.html [Google Scholar]
  101. 101. Natl. Inst. Health 2012. Research supplements to promote diversity in health-related research. Admin. Supp., Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-12-149.html [Google Scholar]
  102. 102. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Genomic sequencing and newborn screening disorders (U19). Req. Appl. RFA-HD-13-010, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-HD-13-010.html [Google Scholar]
  103. 103. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Limited competition: revision applications for basic social and behavioral research on the social, cultural, biological, and psychological mechanisms of stigma (R01). Req. Appl. RFA-MD-13-005, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://www.grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-MD-13-005.html [Google Scholar]
  104. 104. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Research to characterize and reduce stigma to improve health (R01). Program Announc. PA-13-248, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-13-248.html [Google Scholar]
  105. 105. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Research to characterize and reduce stigma to improve health (R03). Program Announc. PA-13-247, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-13-247.html [Google Scholar]
  106. 106. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Research to characterize and reduce stigma to improve health (R21). Program Announc. PA-13-246, Natl. Inst. Health, Bethesda, MD. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-13-246.html [Google Scholar]
  107. 107. Natl. Inst. Health 2013. Sequestration operating plan for FY 2013. http://officeofbudget.od.nih.gov/pdfs/FY14/POST%20ONLINE_NIH.pdf [Google Scholar]
  108. 108. Natl. Inst. Health Off. Extramur. Res 2013. Grants and funding: information for foreign applicants and grantees. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/foreign [Google Scholar]
  109. 109. Natl. Inst. Health Off. Sci. Policy 2011. Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health, and Society archives http://osp.od.nih.gov/office-clinical-research-and-bioethics-policy/genetics-health-and-society/sacghs-archives [Google Scholar]
  110. 110. Natl. Res. Counc 1988. Mapping and Sequencing the Human Genome. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. Press http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=1097 [Google Scholar]
  111. 111. NIH/DOE Work. Group Ethical Leg. Soc. Implic. Hum. Genome Res 1993. Genetic information and health insurance: report of the Task Force on Genetic Information and Insurance. Hum. Gene Ther. 4:789–808 [Google Scholar]
  112. 112. Noble AA, Moulton BW 2006. DNA fingerprinting and civil liberties. J. Law Med. Ethics 34:171–475 [Google Scholar]
  113. Parens E, Chapman AR, Press N. 113.  2008. Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Conversation Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  114. 114. Pres. Comm. Study Bioeth. Issues 2013. President Obama requests Bioethics Commission to play early role in BRAIN Initiative. http://bioethics.gov/node/2224 [Google Scholar]
  115. Pressman L, Burgess R, Cook-Deegan RM, McCormack SJ, Nami-Wolk I. 115.  et al. 2006. The licensing of DNA patents by US academic institutions: an empirical survey. Nat. Biotechnol. 24:31–39 [Google Scholar]
  116. Qaseem A, Aronson M, Fitterman N, Snow V, Weiss KB, Owens DK. 116.  2005. Screening for hereditary hemochromatosis: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann. Intern. Med. 143:517–21 [Google Scholar]
  117. Rai AK, Sampat BN. 117.  2012. Accountability in patenting of federally funded research. Nat. Biotechnol. 30:953–56 [Google Scholar]
  118. Robertson JA. 118.  2003. Extending preimplantation genetic diagnosis: the ethical debate. Ethical issues in new uses of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum. Reprod. 18:465–71 [Google Scholar]
  119. Ross LF, Saal HM, David KL, Anderson RR. 119.  2013. Technical report: ethical and policy issues in genetic testing and screening of children. Genet. Med. 15:234–45 [Google Scholar]
  120. Rothenberg K, Fuller B, Rothstein M, Duster T, Ellis Kahn MJ. 120.  et al. 1997. Genetic information and the workplace: legislative approaches and policy changes. Science 275:1755–57 [Google Scholar]
  121. Rotimi C, Leppert M, Matsuda I, Zeng C, Zhang H. 121.  et al. 2007. Community engagement and informed consent in the International HapMap project. Community Genet. 10:186–98 [Google Scholar]
  122. Sankar P, Cho MK. 122.  2002. Toward a new vocabulary of human genetic variation. Science 298:1337–38 [Google Scholar]
  123. Scherr AE. 123.  2013. Genetic privacy and the Fourth Amendment: unregulated surreptitious DNA harvesting. Ga. Law Rev. 47:445–526 [Google Scholar]
  124. 124. Secr. Advis. Comm. Genet. Health Soc 2010. Gene patents and licensing practices and their impact on patient access to genetic tests Rep., US Dep. Health Hum. Serv., Washington, DC. http://osp.od.nih.gov/sites/default/files/SACGHS_patents_report_2010.pdf [Google Scholar]
  125. Singer E, Antonucci TC, Burmeister M, Couper MP, Raghunathan TE, Van Hoewyk J. 125.  2007. Beliefs about genes and environment as determinants of behavioral characteristics. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 19:331–53 [Google Scholar]
  126. Singer E, Couper MP, Raghunathan TE, Antonucci TC, Burmeister M, Van Hoewyk J. 126.  2010. The effect of question framing and response options on the relationship between racial attitudes and beliefs about genes as causes of behavior. Public Opin. Q. 74:460–76 [Google Scholar]
  127. Smith RA, Cokkinides V, von Eschenbach AC, Levin B, Cohen C. 127.  et al. 2002. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. CA Cancer J. Clin. 52:8–22 [Google Scholar]
  128. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, Burke W, Costanza ME. 128.  et al. 2003. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J. Clin. 53:141–69 [Google Scholar]
  129. Tabor HK, Stock J, Brazg T, McMillin MJ, Dent KM. 129.  et al. 2012. Informed consent for whole genome sequencing: a qualitative analysis of participant expectations and perceptions of risks, benefits, and harms. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 158A:1310–19 [Google Scholar]
  130. Tercyak KP, Peshkin BN, Demarco TA, Patenaude AF, Schneider KA. 130.  et al. 2007. Information needs of mothers regarding communicating BRCA1/2 cancer genetic test results to their children. Genet. Test. 11:249–55 [Google Scholar]
  131. 131. US Dep. Health Hum. Serv 2011. . Human subjects research protections: enhancing protections for research subjects and reducing burden, delay, and ambiguity for investigators. 76 Fed. Reg. 44512–31 (Jul. 26). http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-26/html/2011-18792.htm [Google Scholar]
  132. 132. US Dep. Health Hum. Serv 2013. Discretionary Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children. http://www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/mchbadvisory/heritabledisorders [Google Scholar]
  133. 133. US Dep. Health Hum. Serv 2013. Secretary's Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (SACHRP). http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp [Google Scholar]
  134. 134. US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm 2000. Policy guidance on executive order 13145: to prohibit discrimination in federal employment based on genetic information. Not. 915.002, US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm., Washington, DC. http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/guidance-genetic.html [Google Scholar]
  135. 135. US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm 2005. EEOC Compliance Manual 2 EEOC Order 915.002 Washington, DC: US Equal Employ. Oppor. Comm. [Google Scholar]
  136. 136. US Natl. Nanotechnol. Init 2013. Ethical, legal, and societal issues. http://www.nano.gov/you/ethical-legal-issues [Google Scholar]
  137. Veenstra DL, Roth JA, Garrison LP, Ramsey SD, Burke W. 137.  2010. A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice. Genet. Med. 12:686–93 [Google Scholar]
  138. Wagner JK, Cooper JD, Sterling R, Royal CD. 138.  2012. Tilting at windmills no longer: a data-driven discussion of DTC DNA ancestry tests. Genet. Med. 14:586–93 [Google Scholar]
  139. Waisbren SE, Albers S, Amato S, Ampola M, Brewster TG. 139.  et al. 2003. Effect of expanded newborn screening for biochemical genetic disorders on child outcomes and parental stress. JAMA 290:2564–72 [Google Scholar]
  140. Watson MS, Mann MY, Lloyd-Puryear MA, Rinaldo P, Howell RR. 140.  2006. Newborn screening: toward a uniform screening panel and system. Genet. Med. 8:Suppl. 11S–252S [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-genom-090413-025327
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-genom-090413-025327
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplementary Data

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error