Wrestling with Public Input on an Ethical Analysis of Scientific Research

Author:

Martschenko Daphne Oluwaseun,Callier Shawneequa L.,Garrison Nanibaa’ A.,Lee Sandra Soo‐Jin,Turley Patrick,Meyer Michelle N.,Parens Erik

Abstract

AbstractBioethicists frequently call for empirical researchers to engage participants and community members in their research, but don't themselves typically engage community members in their normative research. In this article, we describe an effort to include members of the public in normative discussions about the risks, potential benefits, and ethical responsibilities of social and behavioral genomics (SBG) research. We reflect on what might—and might not— be gained from engaging the public in normative scholarship and on lessons learned about public perspectives on the risks and potential benefits of SBG research and the responsible conduct and communication of such research. We also provide procedural lessons for others in bioethics who are interested in engaging members of the public in their research.

Funder

Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Russell Sage Foundation

JPB Foundation

National Institute on Aging

Open Philanthropy Project

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Health Policy,Philosophy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science),Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering,Environmental Engineering

Reference10 articles.

1. Where necessary to improve readability grammatical and spelling errors have been corrected.

2. “I don’t want to be Henrietta Lacks”: diverse patient perspectives on donating biospecimens for precision medicine research

3. “Wrestling with Social and Behavioral Genomics: Risks Potential Benefits and Ethical Responsibility ” The Hastings Center accessed September 24 2020 https://www.thehastingscenter.org/who-we-are/our-research/current-projects/wrestling-with-social-and-behavioral-genomics-risks-potential-benefits-and-ethical-responsibility/.

4. Experiences from a community advisory Board in the Implementation of early access to ART for all in Eswatini: a qualitative study

5. M. N.Meyeret al. “A Mixed Methods Study of Attitudes of Participants at Two Biobanks to Studying Medical Social and Behavioral Phenotypes ” (unpublished manuscript in progress January 17 2022) Microsoft Word file.

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