Mental health and perceptions of biomarker research – possible effects on participation

References

• Academy of Medical Sciences. Personal data for public good: using health information in medical research. Academy of Medical Sciences, London 2006
   Google Scholar
• Armstrong V., Barnett J., Cooper H., Monkman M., Moran-Ellis J., Shepherd R. Public perspectives on the governance of biomedical research: a qualitative study in a deliberative context. Wellcome Trust, London 2007
   Google Scholar
• Austin J. C., Smith G. N., Honer W. G. The genomic era and perceptions of psychotic disorders: Genetic risk estimation, associations with reproductive decisions and views about predictive testing. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics 2006; 141B(8)926–928
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Biesecker B., Peay H. Ethical issues in psychiatric genetics research: points to consider. Psychopharmacology 2003; 171(1)27–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biomarker Definitions Working Group. Biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: preferred definitions and conceptual framework. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2001; 69(3)89–95
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Condit C. M. How the public understands genetics: Non-deterministic and non-discriminatory interpretations of the ‘blueprint’ metaphor. Public Understanding of Science 1999; 8(3)169–180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creeden T. M., Manowitz P., Hamer R. M., Ballou J. The belief in the role of genetics in the development of alcoholism [abstract]. Journal of Genetic Counseling 2000; 9(6)538
   Google Scholar
• Dietrich S., Matschinger H., Angermeyer M. C. The Relationship between Biogenetic Causal Explanations and Social Distance toward People with Mental Disorders: Results from a Population Survey in Germany. International Journal of Social Psychiatry 2006; 52(2)166–174
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frazzetto G., Gross C. Beyond susceptibility: behavioral genetics can advance our understanding of psychiatric disorders, but might not meet the expectations for new cures. EMBO Reports 2007; 8: S3–S6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hedgecoe A. Schizophrenia and the Narrative of Enlightened Geneticization. Social Studies of Science 2001; 31(6)875–911
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hedgecoe A. The politics of personalised medicine: pharmacogenetics in the clinic. Cambridge University Press, New York 2004
   Google Scholar
• Illes F., Rietz C., Fuchs M., Ohlraun S., Prell K., Rudinger G., et al. Einstellung zu psychiatrisch-genetischer Forschung und prädiktiver Diagnostik. Ethik in der Medizin 2003; 15(4)268–281
   Google Scholar
• Ipsos MORI. The use of personal health information in medical research: general public consultation. Final report. MRC. 2007
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins S. In the age of leaky data, there is no such thing as a secure online computer. The Guardian 2007, 7 December; 42
   Google Scholar
• Jones I., Scourfield J., McCandless F., Craddock N. Attitudes towards future testing for bipolar disorder susceptibility genes: a preliminary investigation. Journal of Affective Disorders 2002; 71(1 – 3)189–193
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kuyken W., Brewin C. R., Power M. J., Furnham A. Causal beliefs about depression in depressed patients, clinical psychologists and lay persons. British Journal of Medical Psychology 1992; 65: 257–268
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lock M., Freeman J., Sharples R., Lloyd S. When it runs in the family: putting susceptibility genes in perspective. Public Understanding of Science 2006; 15(3)277–300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meiser B., Mitchell P. B., Kasparian N. A., Strong K., Simpson J. M., Mireskandari S., et al. Attitudes towards childbearing, causal attributions for bipolar disorder and psychological distress: a study of families with multiple cases of bipolar disorder. Psychological Medicine 2007; 37: 1601–1611
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meiser B., Mitchell P. B., McGirr H., Van Herten M., Schofield P. R. Implications of genetic risk information in families with a high density of bipolar disorder: an exploratory study. Social Science & Medicine 2005; 60(1)109–118
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Mental Disorders and Genetics: The Ethical Context. Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London 1998
   Google Scholar
• Phelan J. C. Geneticization of Deviant Behavior and Consequences for Stigma: The Case of Mental Illness. Journal of Health & Social Behavior 2005; 46: 307–322
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Read J., Haslam N., Sayce L., Davies E. Prejudice and schizophrenia: a review of the “mental illness is an illness like any other” approach. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2006; 114(5)303–318
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts L. W., Warner T. D., Geppert C. M. A., Rogers M., Green Hammond K. A. Employees' perspectives on ethically important aspects of genetic research participation: a pilot study. Comprehensive Psychiatry 2005; 46(1)27–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Soskolne C. L. Ethical, social, and legal issues surrounding studies of susceptible populations and individuals. Environmental Health Perspectives 1997; 105(Supplement 4)837–841
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Steinbart E. J., Smith C. O., Poorkaj P., Bird T. D. Impact of DNA Testing for Early-Onset Familial Alzheimer Disease and Frontotemporal Dementia. Archives of Neurology 2001; 58(11)1828–1831
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Trippitelli C. L., Jamison K. R., Folstein M. F., Bartko J. J., DePaulo J. R. Pilot Study on Patients' and Spouses' Attitudes Toward Potential Genetic Testing for Bipolar Disorder. The American Journal of Psychiatry 1998; 155(7)899–904
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walley T. Using personal health information in medical research. BMJ 2006; 332(7534)130–131
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Williams B., Healy D. Perceptions of illness causation among new referrals to a community mental health team: “explanatory model” or “exploratory map”?. Social Science & Medicine 2001; 53(4)465–476
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wynne B. Public uptake of science: A case for institutional reflexivity. Public Understanding of Science 1993; 2(4)321–337
   Google Scholar