The ethical challenges of diversifying genomic data: A qualitative evidence synthesis

Author:

Hardcastle FaranakORCID,Lyle Kate,Horton RachelORCID,Samuel Gabrielle,Weller Susie,Ballard Lisa,Thompson Rachel,De Paula Trindade Luiz Valerio,Gómez Urrego José David,Kochin Daniel,Johnson Tess,Tatz-Wieder Nechama,Redrup Hill Elizabeth,Robinson Adams Florence,Eskandar Yoseph,Harriss Eli,Tsosie Krystal S.,Dixon Padraig,Mackintosh Maxine,Nightingale Lyra,Lucassen AnnekeORCID

Abstract

Abstract This article aims to explore the ethical issues arising from attempts to diversify genomic data and include individuals from underserved groups in studies exploring the relationship between genomics and health. We employed a qualitative synthesis design, combining data from three sources: 1) a rapid review of empirical articles published between 2000 and 2022 with a primary or secondary focus on diversifying genomic data, or the inclusion of underserved groups and ethical issues arising from this, 2) an expert workshop and 3) a narrative review. Using these three sources we found that ethical issues are interconnected across structural factors and research practices. Structural issues include failing to engage with the politics of knowledge production, existing inequities, and their effects on how harms and benefits of genomics are distributed. Issues related to research practices include a lack of reflexivity, exploitative dynamics and the failure to prioritise meaningful co-production. Ethical issues arise from both the structure and the practice of research, which can inhibit researcher and participant opportunities to diversify data in an ethical way. Diverse data are not ethical in and of themselves, and without being attentive to the social, historical and political contexts that shape the lives of potential participants, endeavours to diversify genomic data run the risk of worsening existing inequities. Efforts to construct more representative genomic datasets need to develop ethical approaches that are situated within wider attempts to make the enterprise of genomics more equitable.

Funder

Wellcome Trust

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Reference145 articles.

1. The Human Genome Diversity Project

2. H3Africa: current perspectives

3. Harmon, A (2017) Why White Supremacists Are Chugging Milk (and Why Geneticists Are Alarmed). The New York Times, 2017, 17 edition. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/us/white-supremacists-science-dna.html.

4. A Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Minority Research Participation Among African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3