Browsing by Author "McCormick, Jennifer B."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Building a Central Repository for Research Ethics Consultation Data: A Proposal for a Standard Data Collection Tool
    (ACTS, 2015-08-01) Cho, Mildred K.; Taylor, Holly; McCormick, Jennifer B.; Anderson, Nick; Barnard, David; Boyle, Mary B.; Capron, Alexander M.; Dorfman, Elizabeth; Havard, Kathryn; Reider, Carson; Sadler, John; Schwartz, Peter H.; Sharp, Richard R.; Danis, Marion; Wilfond, Benjamin S.; Department of Philosophy, IU School of Liberal Arts
    Clinical research ethics consultation services have been established across academic health centers over the past decade. This paper presents the results of collaboration within the CTSA consortium to develop a standard approach to the collection of research ethics consultation information to serve as a foundation for quality improvement, education, and research efforts. This approach includes categorizing and documenting descriptive information about the requestor, research project, the ethical question, the consult process, and describing the basic structure for a consult note. This paper also explores challenges in determining how to share some of this information between collaborating institutions related to concerns about confidentially, data quality, and informatics. While there is much still to be learned to improve the process of clinical research ethics consultation, these tools can advance these efforts, which, in turn, can facilitate the ethical conduct of research.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Patients’ views on variants of uncertain significance across indications
    (Springer, 2019-08-20) Clift, Kristin; Macklin, Sarah; Halverson, Colin; McCormick, Jennifer B.; Abu Dabrh, Abd Moain; Hines, Stephanie; Medicine, School of Medicine
    As genomic sequencing expands into more areas of patient care, an increasing number of patients learn of the variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) that they carry. Understanding the potential psychosocial consequences of the disclosure of a VUS can help inform pre- and post-test counseling discussions. Medical uncertainty in general elicits a variety of responses from patients, particularly in the growing field of medical genetics and genomics. It is important to consider patients’ responses to the ambiguous nature of VUSs across different indications and situational contexts. Genetic counselors and other providers ordering genetic testing should be prepared for the possibility of their patients’ misinterpretation of such results. Pre-test counseling should include a discussion of the possibility of VUSs and what it would mean for the patient’s care and its potential psychosocial impacts. When a VUS is found, post-test counseling should include additional education and a discussion of the variant’s implications and medical management recommendations based on the results. These discussions may help temper subjective interpretations, unrealistic views, and decisional regret.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The Responsibility to Recontact Research Participants after Reinterpretation of Genetic and Genomic Research Results
    (Elsevier, 2019-04-04) Bombard, Yvonne; Brothers, Kyle B.; Fitzgerald-Butt, Sara; Garrison, Nanibaa’ A.; Jamal, Leila; James, Cynthia A.; Jarvik, Gail P.; McCormick, Jennifer B.; Nelson, Tanya N.; Ormond, Kelly E.; Rehm, Heidi L.; Richer, Julie; Souzeau, Emmanuelle; Vassy, Jason L.; Wagner, Jennifer K.; Levy, Howard P.; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine
    The evidence base supporting genetic and genomic sequence-variant interpretations is continuously evolving. An inherent consequence is that a variant's clinical significance might be reinterpreted over time as new evidence emerges regarding its pathogenicity or lack thereof. This raises ethical, legal, and financial issues as to whether there is a responsibility to recontact research participants to provide updates on reinterpretations of variants after the initial analysis. There has been discussion concerning the extent of this obligation in the context of both research and clinical care. Although clinical recommendations have begun to emerge, guidance is lacking on the responsibilities of researchers to inform participants of reinterpreted results. To respond, an American Society of Human Genetics (ASHG) workgroup developed this position statement, which was approved by the ASHG Board in November 2018. The workgroup included representatives from the National Society of Genetic Counselors, the Canadian College of Medical Genetics, and the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors. The final statement includes twelve position statements that were endorsed or supported by the following organizations: Genetic Alliance, European Society of Human Genetics, Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors, American Association of Anthropological Genetics, Executive Committee of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, Canadian College of Medical Genetics, Human Genetics Society of Australasia, and National Society of Genetic Counselors