Beyond Consent: Building Trusting Relationships With Diverse Populations in Precision Medicine Research

REFERENCES

• Anderson, N., and K. Edwards. 2010. Building a chain of trust: Using policy and practice to enhance trustworthy clinical data discovery and sharing. Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on Governance of Technology, Information and Policies 15–20. doi:10.1145/1920320.1920323.
   Google Scholar
• Beecher, H. K. 1966. Ethics and clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 274 (24):1354–60.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulware, I. E., L. A. Cooper, L. E. Ratner, T. A. LaVeist, and N. R. Power. 2003. Race and trust in the health care system. Public Health Reports 118:358–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braunstein, J. B., N. S. Sherber, S. P. Schulman, E. L. Ding, and N. R. Powe. 2008. Race, medical researcher distrust, perceived harm, and willingness to participate in cardiovascular prevention trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 87 (1):1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brothers, K. B., D. R. Morrison, and E. W. Clayton. 2011. Two large-scale surveys on community attitudes toward an opt-out biobank. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 155 (12):2982–90.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buseh, A. G., P. E. Stevens, S. Millon-Underwood, L. Townsend, and S. T. Kelber. 2013. Community leaders' perspectives on engaging African Americans in biobanks and other human genetics initiatives. Journal of Community Genetics 4 (4):483–94.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bussey-Jones, J., J. Garrett, G. Henderson, M. Moloney, C. Blumenthal, and G. Corbie-Smith. 2010. The role of race and trust in tissue/blood donation for genetic research. Genetics in Medicine 12 (2):116–21.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callier, S. L., and V. L. Bonham. 2015. Taking a stand: The genetics community's responsibility for intelligence research. Hastings Center Report 45 (5):S54–58.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cho, M. K., N. Varsava, S. A. Kraft, G. Ashwal, K. Gillespie, D. Magnus, K. E. Ormond, A. Thomas, B. S. Wilfond, and S. S. Lee. 2017. Metaphors matter: From biobank to a library of medical information. Genetics in Medicine 21 Dec 2017. Advance online publication. doi:10.1038/gim.2017.204.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, F. S., and H. Varmus. 2015. A new initiative on precision medicine. New England Journal of Medicine 372 (9):793–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbie-Smith, G., S. B. Thomas, M. V. Williams, and S. Moody-Ayers. 1999. Attitudes and beliefs of African Americans toward participation in medical research. Journal of General Internal Medicine 14 (9):537–46. doi:10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.07048.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corbin, J., and A. Strauss. 2007. Basics of qualitative research. New York, NY: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Damschroder, L. J., J. L. Pritts, M. A. Neblo, R. J. Kalarickal, J. W. Creswell, and R. A. Hayward. 2007. Patients, privacy and trust: Patients' willingness to allow researchers to access their medical records. Social Science and Medicine 64 (1):223–35. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.08.045.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dedoose Version 6.1.18. 2015. Web application for managing, analyzing, and presenting qualitative and mixed method research data. Los Angeles, CA: SocioCultural Research Consultants, LLC. www.dedoose.com.
   Google Scholar
• Dye, T., D. Li, M. Demment, S. Groth, D. Fernandez, A. Dozier, and J. Chang. 2016. Sociocultural variation in attitudes toward use of genetic information and participation in genetic research by race in the United States: Implications for precision medicine. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 23 (4):782–86. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocv214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• eMERGE Network: Electronic Medical Records and Genomics. 2014. Available at: https://emerge.mc.vanderbilt.edu (accessed December 9, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• Freimuth, V.S., S.C. Quinn, S.B. Thomas, G. Cole, E. Zook, and T. Duncan. 2001. African Americans' views on research and the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. Social Science Medicine 52 (5):797–808. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00178-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frye, M. A., A. Doederlein, B. Koenig, et al. 2015. National survey and community advisory board development for a bipolar disorder biobank. Bipolar Disorder 17 (6):598–605. doi:10.1111/bdi.12322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fullerton, S. M., N. R. Anderson, G. Guzauskas, D. Freeman, and K. Fryer-Edwards. 2010. Meeting the governance challenges of next-generation biorepository research. Science Translational Medicine 2 (15):15cm3. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3000361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fullerton, S. M., W. A. Wolf, K. B. Brothers, et al. 2012. Return of individual research results from genome-wide association studies: Experience of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network. Genetics in Medicine 14 (4):424–31. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halbert, C. H., J. McDonald, S. Vadaparampil, L. Rice, and M. Jefferson. 2016. Conducting precision medicine research with African Americans. PLoS ONE 21;11 (7):e0154850. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Henderson, G. E., T. P. Edwards, R. J. Cadigan, et al. 2013. Stewardship practices of U.S. biobanks. Science Translational Medicine 5 (215):215cm7. doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3007362.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holm, I. A., B. R. Iles, S. I. Ziniel, et al. 2015. Participant satisfaction with a preference-setting tool for the return of individual research results in pediatric genomic research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 10 (4):414–26. doi:10.1177/1556264615599620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarvik, G. P., L. M. Amendola, J. S. Berg, et al., eMERGE Act-ROR Committee and CERC Committee, CSER Act-ROR Working Group, and W. Burke. 2014. Return of genomic results to research participants: The floor, the ceiling, and the choices in between. American Journal of Human Genetics 94 (6):818–26. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2014.04.009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kass, N. E., J. Sugarman, R. Faden, and M. Schoch-Spana. 1996. Trust, the fragile foundation of contemporary biomedical research. Hastings Center Report 26 (5):25–29. doi:10.2307/3528467.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, D. J., R. Baker, L. C. Milner, S. Devaney, and K. L. Hudson. 2016. A survey of U.S adults' opinions about conduct of a nationwide Precision Medicine Initiative® cohort study of genes and environment. PLoS ONE 11 (8):e0160461. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0160461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, D. J., J. Murphy-Bollinger, J. Scott, and K. L. Hudson. 2009. Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. American Journal of Human Genetics 85 (5):643–54. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.10.002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaye, J. 2012. The tension between data sharing and the protection of privacy in genomics research. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 13:415–31. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082410-101454.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendell, C., R. Urquhart, J. Petrella, S. MacDonald, and M. McCallum. 2014. Evaluation of an advisory committee as a model for patient engagement. Patient Experience Journal 1 (2):62–70.
   Google Scholar
• Kerasidou, A. 2016. Trust me, I'm a researcher!: The role of trust in biomedical research. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 20 (1):43–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khoury, M., M. Gwinn, P.W. Yoon, N. Dowling, C.A. Moore, and L. Bradley. 2007. The continuum of translation research in genomic medicine: How can we accelerate the appropriate integration of human genome discoveries into health care and disease prevention? Genetics in Medicine 9 (10):665–674. doi:10.1097/GIM.0b013e31815699d0.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koay, P. P., and R. R. Sharp. 2013. The role of patient advocacy organizations in shaping genomic science. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 14:579–95. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-091212-153525.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lang, R., V. A. Kelkar, J. R. Byrd, C. L. Edwards, M. Pericak-Vance, and G.S. Byrd. 2013. African American participation in health-related research studies: Indicators for effective recruitment. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice 19 (2):110–18. doi:10.1097/PHH.0b013e31825717ef.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, A. A., W. A. Wolf, J. Hebert-Beirne, and M. E. Smith. 2010. Public and biobank participant attitudes toward genetic research participation and data sharing. Public Health Genomics 13 (6):368–77. doi:10.1159/000276767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, A. A., M. E. Smith, W. A. Wolf, S. B. Trinidad, and GRRIP Consortium. 2011. Broad data sharing in genetic research: Views of institutional review board professionals. IRB: Ethics and Human Research 33 (3):1–5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levi, M., and L. Stoker. 2000. Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science 3:475–507. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.3.1.475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longstaff, H., and M. M. Burgess. 2010. Recruiting for representation in public deliberation on the ethics of biobanks. Public Understanding of Science 19 (2):212–24. doi:10.1177/0963662508097626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCarty, C. A., A. Garber, J. C. Reeser, and N. C. Fost. 2012. Study newsletters, community and ethics advisory boards, and focus group discussions provide ongoing feedback for a large biobank. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 155 (4):737–41. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.33896.
   Google Scholar
• McGregor, T. L., S. L. Van Driest, K. B. Brothers, E. A. Bowton, L. J. Muglia, and D. M. Roden. 2013. Inclusion of pediatric samples in an opt-out biorepository linking DNA to de-identified medical records: Pediatric BioVU. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 93 (2):204–11. doi:10.1038/clpt.2012.230.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McWhirter, R. E., C. R. Critchley, D. Nicol, et al. 2014. Community engagement for big epidemiology: Deliberative democracy as a tool. Journal of Personalized Medicine 4 (4):459–74. doi:10.3390/jpm4040459.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mehlman, K., L. B. Moraia, C. Mitchell, M. Morrison, H. Teare, and J. Kaye. 2014. The evolution of withdrawal: Negotiating research relationships in biobanking. Life Sciences, Society and Policy 10:16. doi:10.1186/s40504-014-0016-5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moodley, K., and S. Singh. 2016. “It's all about trust”: Reflections of researchers on the complexity and controversy surrounding biobanking in South Africa. BMC Medical Ethics 17:57. doi:10.1186/s12910-016-0140-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Institutes of Health. 2016. All of Us research program. Available at: https://www.nih.gov/research-training/allofus-research-program (accessed December 9, 2016).
   Google Scholar
• O'Doherty, K. C., and M. M. Burgess. 2009. Engaging the public on biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation. Public Health Genomics 12:203–15. doi:10.1159/000167801.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Doherty, K. C., M. M. Burgess, K. Edwards, et al. 2011. From consent to institutions: Designing adaptive governance for genomic biobanks. Social Science and Medicine 73 (3):367–74. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.05.046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Office of Human Research Protections. 2017. Federal policy for the protection of human subjects. Federal Register 82 (12):7149–274.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Olson, N. W. 2015. Medical researchers' ancillary care obligations: The relationship-based approach. Bioethics 30 (5):317–24. doi:10.1111/bioe.12212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Platt, J., and S. Kardia. 2015. Public trust in health information sharing: Implications for biobanking and electronic health record systems. Journal of Personalized Medicine 5 (1):3–21. doi:10.3390/jpm5010003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Popejoy, A. B., and S. M. Fullerton. 2016. Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature 538:161–164.
   Google Scholar
• Rahm, A. K., M. Wrenn, N. M. Carroll, and H. S. Feigelson. 2013. Biobanking for research: A survey of patient population attitudes and understanding. Journal of Community Genetics 4 (4):445–50. doi:10.1007/s12687-013-0146-0.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. 2009. The clinical investigator–subject relationship: A contextual approach. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine 4:16. doi:10.1186/1747-5341-4-16.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Richardson, H. S., and M. K. Cho. 2012. Secondary researchers' duties to return incidental findings and individual research results: A partial-entrustment account. Genetics in Medicine 14 (4):467–72. doi:10.1038/gim.2012.12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richardson, H. S., and L. Belsky. 2004. The ancillary-care responsibilities of medical researchers. Hastings Center Report 34 (1):25–33. doi:10.2307/3528248.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, S. L. 2013. Patient advocacy organizations: Institutional conflicts of interest, trust, and trustworthiness. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 41 (3):680–87. doi:10.1111/jlme.12078.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, G. W., and H. R. Bernard. 2003. Techniques to identify themes. Field Methods 15:85–109. doi:10.1177/1525822X02239569.
   Google Scholar
• Shavers, V.L., C.F. Lynch, and L.F. Burmeister. 2000. Knowledge of the Tuskegee study and its impact on the willingness to participate in medical research studies. Journal of the National Medical Association 92 (12):563–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spencer, K., C. Sanders, E. A. Whitley, D. Lund, J. Kaye, and W. G. Dixon. 2016. Patient perspectives on sharing anonymized personal health data using a digital system for dynamic consent and research feedback: A qualitative study. Journal of Medical Internet Research 18 (4):e66, published online 2016 April 15. doi:10.2196/jmir.5011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart, D. W., P. N. Shamdasani, and D. W. Rook. 2007. Focus groups: Theory and practice, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sudlow, C., J. Gallacher, N. Allen, et al. 2015. UK Biobank: An open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide range of complex diseases of middle and old age. PLOS One 12 (3):e1001779.
   Google Scholar
• Trinidad, S. B., S. M. Fullerton, J. M. Bares, G. P. Jarvik, E. B. Larson, and W. Burke. 2012. Informed consent in genome-scale research: What do prospective participants think? AJOB Primary Research 3 (3):3–11. doi:10.1080/21507716.2012.662575.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• U.S. Census Bureau. 2015. QuickFacts. Available at: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PST045216 (accessed August 25, 2017).
   Google Scholar
• Yarborough, M., K. Fryer-Edwards, G. Geller, and R. R. Sharp. 2009. Transforming the culture of biomedical research from compliance to trustworthiness: Insights from nonmedical sectors. Academic Medicine 84:472–77. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31819a8aa6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarborough, M., and R. R. Sharp. 2002. Restoring and preserving trust in biomedical research. Academic Medicine 77:8–14. doi:10.1097/00001888-200201000-00005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zdechlik, M. 2017. Muslim, health leaders team up to curb measles outbreak. Minnesota Public Radio News, June 5. Available at: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2017/06/05/muslim-health-leaders-team-up-to-curb-measles-outbreak (accessed August 15, 2017).
   Google Scholar