Abstract
Purpose Patient-participants in psychiatric genetics research may be at an increased risk for negative psychosocial impacts related to the return of genetic research results. Examining psychiatric genetics researchers’ return of results practices and perspectives can aid the development of empirically-informed and ethically-sound guidelines.
Methods A survey of 407 psychiatric genetics researchers from 39 countries was conducted to examine current return of results practices, attitudes, and knowledge.
Results Most respondents (61%) reported that their studies generated medically relevant genomic findings. Although 24% have returned results to individual participants, 52% of those involved in decisions about return of results plan to return or continue to return results. Respondents supported offering medically actionable results related to psychiatric disorders (82%), and the majority agreed non-medically actionable risks for Huntington’s (71%) and Alzheimer’s disease (64%) should be offered. About half (49%) of respondents supported offering reliable polygenic risk scores for psychiatric conditions. Despite plans to return, only 14% of researchers agreed there are adequate guidelines for returning results, and 59% rated their knowledge about how to manage the process for returning results as poor.
Conclusion Psychiatric genetics researchers support returning a wide range of results to patient-participants, but they lack adequate knowledge and guidelines.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research for this article was funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant R00HG008689 (Lazaro-Munoz, G). The views expressed are those of the authors alone, and do not necessarily reflect views of NIH or Baylor College of Medicine.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Baylor College of Medicine's Institutional Review Board re-approved this protocol #H-41548 on May 7, 2020.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Conflict of Interest The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest.
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.