Compare and contrast: a cross-national study across UK, USA and Greek experts regarding return of incidental findings from clinical sequencing.
journal contributionposted on 2015-06-29, 11:18 authored by Elli G. Gourna, Natalie Armstrong, Susan E. Wallace
Return of incidental findings (IFs) from clinical sequencing has become a hotly debated topic over the past year. Efforts are being made by several bodies to provide guidance at both national and international levels; however, no studies comparing attitudes of experts across different countries have been published so far. Our goal was to investigate attitudes towards return of IFs from clinical sequencing across UK, USA and Greek experts. Thirty in-depth interviews were conducted with genetics and genomic experts with different backgrounds. Our study revealed more differences when experts were compared according to their professional background than their country. General principles guiding the decision-making and the feedback process were common across all experts but the details of integrating these tests might vary as different professionals reported different needs and attitudes.
This study is part of a PhD program funded by College of Medical, Biological Sciences & Psychology PhD Studentship, University of Leicester.
CitationEuropean Journal of Human Genetics, 2015
Author affiliation/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences
- AM (Accepted Manuscript)