Guideline for feedback of individual genetic research findings for genomics research in Africa

Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations in genomic research

The role of genomic research and medicine in improving health continues to grow significantly, highlighting the need for increased equitable inclusion of diverse populations in genomics. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander (NHPI) communities are often missing from these efforts to ensure that the benefits of genomics are accessible to all individuals. In this article, we analyze the qualities of NHPI populations relevant to their inclusion in genomic research and investigate their current representation using data from the genome-wide association studies (GWAS) catalog. A discussion of the barriers NHPI experience regarding participating in research and recommendations to improve NHPI representation in genomic research are also included.

Parental perspectives regarding the return of genomic research results in neurodevelopmental disorders in South Africa: anticipated impact and preferences

Few policies and little research exist regarding the disclosure of genomic results to research participants in Africa. As understanding participant preferences would be pivotal to the success of the feedback process, this study set out to address this issue by engaging with enrolled participants from an ongoing genomics research project on neurodevelopmental disorders with the aim to assess the anticipated impact of receiving pertinent results and explore the preferences for feedback in a South African context. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 parents of children participating in the research study. Transcribed interview data and observational notes were analysed using thematic analysis and framework matrices. Participants linked their own meaning to the impact of receiving a pertinent result and perceived the information as useful for reasons other than only clinical utility. These included closure, improved management of their child's condition and information regarding recurrence risks. In terms of preferences for feedback, an in-person result delivery session, conducted by a member of the study team or medical professional familiar with their child was preferred. In addition, participants felt a sense of ownership over their blood or their contribution to the research study, finding meaning even in non-pertinent results. These findings provide insight into the type of discussions that may be valuable in enabling the development of best practices and guidelines for the return of individual genetic research results, in a culturally appropriate manner, within South African communities.

Should institutions fund the feedback of individual findings in genomic research?

The article argues the thesis that institutions have a prima facie obligation to fund the feedback of individual findings in genomic research conducted on the African continent by drawing arguments from an underexplored Afro-communitarian view of distributive justice and rights of researchers to be aided. Whilst some studies have explored how institutions have a duty to support return as a form of ancillary care or additional foreseeable service in research by mostly appealing to dominant principles and theories in the Global North, this mostly normative study explores this question by appealing to underexplored African philosophy. This is a new way of thinking about institutional responsibility to fund feedback and responds to the call to decolonise health research in Africa. Further studies are required to study how this prima facie obligation will interact with social contexts and an institution's extant relationships to find an actual duty. The research community should also work out procedures, policies and governance structures to facilitate feedback. In our opinion, though the impacts of feeding back can inform how institutions think about their actual duty, these do not obliterate the binding duty to fund feedback.

Parental Perspectives Regarding the Return of Genomic Research Results in Neurodevelopmental Disorders in South Africa: Anticipated Impact and Preferences

Few policies and little research exist regarding the disclosure of genomic results to research participants in Africa. As understanding participant preferences would be pivotal to the success of the feedback process, this study set out to address this issue by engaging with enrolled participants from an ongoing genomics research project on neurodevelopmental disorders with the aim to assess the anticipated impact of receiving pertinent results and explore the preferences for feedback in a South-African context. Twelve semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 parents of children participating in the research study. Transcribed interview data and observational notes were analysed using thematic analysis and framework matrices. Participants linked their own meaning to the impact of receiving a pertinent result and perceived the information as useful for reasons other than only clinical utility. These included closure, improved management of their child's condition and information regarding recurrence risks. In terms of preferences for feedback, an in-person result delivery session, conducted by a member of the study team or medical professional familiar with their child was preferred. In addition, participants felt a sense of ownership over their blood or their contribution to the research study, finding meaning even in non-pertinent (secondary findings) or negative results. These findings provide insight into the type of discussions that may be valuable in enabling the development of best practices and guidelines for the return of individual genetic research results, in a culturally appropriate manner, within South-African communities.

Perspectives of researchers, science policy makers and research ethics committee members on the feedback of individual genetic research findings in African genomics research

BACKGROUND

Genetic research can yield information that is unrelated to the study's objectives but may be of clinical or personal interest to study participants. There is an emerging but controversial responsibility to return some genetic research results, however there is little evidence available about the views of genomic researchers and others on the African continent.

METHODS

We conducted a continental survey to solicit perspectives of researchers, science policy makers and research ethics committee members on the feedback of individual genetic research findings in African genomics research.

RESULTS

A total of 110 persons participated in the survey with 51 complete and 59 incomplete surveys received. Data was summarised using descriptive analysis. Overall, our respondents believed that individual genetic research results that are clinically actionable should be returned to study participants apparently because participants have a right to know things about their health, and it might also be a means for research participation to be recognized. Nonetheless, there is a need for development of precise guidance on how to return individual genetic research findings in African genomics research.

DISCUSSION

Participants should receive information that could promote a healthier lifestyle; only clinically actionable findings should be returned, and participants should receive all important information that is directly relevant to their health. Nevertheless, detailed guidelines should inform what ought to be returned. H3Africa guidelines stipulate that it is generally considered good practice for researchers to feedback general study results, but there is no consensus about whether individual genomic study results should also be fed back. The decision on what individual results to feedback, if any, is very challenging and the specific context is important to make an appropriate determination.

Genetic tests as the strongest motivator of cooperation between participants and biobanks-Findings from cross-sectional study

Introduction

The development of the scientific potential linked with biobanking and research on human biological material is highly dependent on the willingness of potential donors to cooperate with entities that collect the material. For this reason, it is crucial to identify the circumstances and factors that may encourage potential participants to donate their biological material. In particular, knowledge of the motivational factors that can be modified by the persons managing a biobank may prove notably important for shaping the organizational and communication policy of the biobank and other scientific institutions.

Material and methods

The research was carried out on a group of 1,100 people over 18 years of age representing the adult population of Poland in 2021.

Results

More than half of the respondents declared their willingness to donate a blood sample for research purposes to a biobank (57.8%). The most often indicated incentives among the factors supporting the donation of biological material were offers of: obtaining the results of genetic tests predicting the risk of diseases (77.1%), blood tests (71.3%), the possibility of obtaining a small remuneration (64.6%) and the carrying out of genetic ancestry tests (60.4%).

Conclusion

Offering the possibility of performing additional diagnostic tests, especially genetic tests, may significantly increase the willingness of potential donors to cooperate with biobanks and other entities collecting human biological material for the purpose of scientific research. However, attention should also be paid to the challenges and risks linked with respecting the privacy and autonomy of research participants.

Parents and Provider Perspectives on the Return of Genomic Findings for Cleft Families in Africa

BACKGROUND

Inadequate knowledge among health care providers (HCPs) and parents of affected children limits the understanding and utility of secondary genetic findings (SFs) in under-represented populations in genomics research. SFs arise from deep DNA sequencing done for research or diagnostic purposes and may burden patients and their families despite their potential health importance. This study aims to evaluate the perspective of both groups regarding SFs and their choices in the return of results from genetic testing in the context of orofacial clefts.

METHODS

Using an online survey, we evaluated the experiences of 252 HCPs and 197 parents across participating cleft clinics in Ghana and Nigeria toward the return of SFs across several domains.

RESULTS

Only 1.6% of the HCPs felt they had an expert understanding of when and how to incorporate genomic medicine into practice, while 50.0% agreed that all SFs should be returned to patients. About 95.4% of parents were willing to receive all the information from genetic testing (including SFs), while the majority cited physicians as their primary information source (64%).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, parents and providers were aware that genetic testing could help in the clinical management of diseases. However, they cited a lack of knowledge about genomic medicine, uncertain clinical utility, and lack of available learning resources as barriers. The knowledge gained from this study will assist with developing guidelines and policies to guide providers on the return of SFs in sub-Saharan Africa and across the continent.

Open Science Practices in Psychiatric Genetics: A Primer

Open science ensures that research is transparently reported and freely accessible for all to assess and collaboratively build on. Psychiatric genetics has led among the health sciences in implementing some open science practices in common study designs, such as replication as part of genome-wide association studies. However, thorough open science implementation guidelines are limited and largely not specific to data, privacy, and research conduct challenges in psychiatric genetics. Here, we present a primer of open science practices, including selection of a research topic with patients/nonacademic collaborators, equitable authorship and citation practices, design of replicable, reproducible studies, preregistrations, open data, and privacy issues. We provide tips for informative figures and inclusive, precise reporting. We discuss considerations in working with nonacademic collaborators and distributing research through preprints, blogs, social media, and accessible lecture materials. Finally, we provide extra resources to support every step of the research process.

Ethical principles, challenges and opportunities when conducting genetic counselling for schizophrenia

Ethical challenges of genetic counselling for schizophrenia include effective communication of critical scientific information in an easily understood manner by patients and relatives, and the ability to ensure communication is unencumbered by medical jargon. Levels of literacy in the target population may limit this process, making it difficult for patients to attain the desired levels of informed consent to make crucial decisions during genetic counselling. Multilingualism in target communities may further complicate such communication. This paper outlines the ethical principles, challenges and opportunities facing clinicians when conducting genetic counselling for schizophrenia and how these might be met, drawing on lessons from South African studies. The paper draws on reflections of clinician and researcher experiences gained from clinical practice or research on the genetics of schizophrenia and psychotic disorders in South Africa. The context of genetic studies in schizophrenia is used to illustrate the ethical challenges in genetic counselling for schizophrenia, both in clinical and research settings. Attention is also drawn to multicultural and multilingual populations, particularly where the preferred language lacks a well-developed scientific language of communication for some of the genetic concepts that have to be presented during the genetic counselling process. The authors describe the ethical challenges and how to address these to empower patients and relatives to make well-informed decisions despite these obstacles. Principles applied by clinicians and researchers during the genetic counselling are described. Potential solutions, including the establishment of community advisory boards to address potential ethical challenges inherent to the genetic counselling process, are also shared. Genetic counselling for schizophrenia still faces ethical challenges which require a balance of principles of beneficence, autonomy, informed consent, confidentiality and distributive justice, while striving to present accuracy in the science that guides the process. Evolution in language and cultural competency therefore needs to occur alongside scientific advances in genetic research. Key stakeholders need to partner and build capacity and expertise in genetic counselling through the provision of funding and resources. The goal of partnerships is to empower patients, relatives, clinicians and researchers to share scientific information in a manner guided by empathy while retaining scientific accuracy.

Advancing disease genomics beyond COVID-19 and reducing health disparities: what does the future hold for Africa?

The COVID-19 pandemic has ushered in high-throughput sequencing technology as an essential public health tool. Scaling up and operationalizing genomics in Africa is crucial as enhanced capacity for genome sequencing could address key health problems relevant to African populations. High-quality genomics research can be leveraged to improve diagnosis, understand the aetiology of unexplained illnesses, improve surveillance of infectious diseases and inform efficient control and therapeutic methods of known, rare and emerging infectious diseases. Achieving these within Africa requires strong commitment from stakeholders. A roadmap is needed to guide training of scientists, infrastructural development, research funding, international collaboration as well as promote public–private partnerships. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly boosted genomics capacity in Africa, the continent still lags other regions. Here, we highlighted key initiatives in genomics research and efforts to address health challenges facing the diverse and fast-growing populations on the continent. We explore the scalability of genomic tools and techniques to tackle a broader range of infectious diseases in Africa, a continent that desperately requires a boost from genomic science.

Perspectives and experiences of researchers regarding feedback of incidental genomic research findings: A qualitative study

Background

There is a plethora of unanswered ethical questions about sharing incidental findings in genetics and genomics research. Yet understanding and addressing such issues is necessary for communicating incidental findings with participants. We explored researchers’ perspectives and experiences regarding feedback of incidental genomics findings to participants.

Methods

This was a qualitative study using semi-structured interview schedules for In-depth interviews. Thirty respondents were purposively selected based on role as genetics and genomics researchers in Uganda. Data were analysed through content analysis to identify emerging themes using a comprehensive thematic matrix. QSR International NVivo software was used to support data analysis.

Results

a). On perceptions, sharing of incidental findings was acceptable and four themes emerged including role of professional judgement; role of ethics committees and ethical guidelines; optimal disclosure practices; limits to professional duty and uncertainty and; b). on practices, sharing had been carried out by some researchers and a theme on experience and practices emerged.

Conclusion

Feedback of incidental genomics research findings to participants is generally acceptable to researchers. Some researchers. Challenges include lack of ethical guidelines and uncertainty about the findings.