Using Newborn Screening Bloodspots for Research: Public Preferences for Policy Options

Author:

Hayeems Robin Z.12,Miller Fiona A.2,Barg Carolyn J.2,Bombard Yvonne23,Cressman Celine2,Painter-Main Michael2,Wilson Brenda4,Little Julian4,Allanson Judith56,Avard Denise7,Giguere Yves89,Chakraborty Pranesh56,Carroll June C.10

Affiliation:

1. Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

2. Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

3. Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada;

4. School of Epidemiology, Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada;

5. Departments of Genetics, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, and

6. Pediatrics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada;

7. Centre for Genomics and Policy, Department of Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada;

8. Departments of Medical Biology, CHU de Québec, and

9. Molecular Biology, Medical Biochemistry and Pathology, Université Laval, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and

10. Department of Family and Community Medicine, Sinai Health System, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Retaining residual newborn screening (NBS) bloodspots for medical research remains contentious. To inform this debate, we sought to understand public preferences for, and reasons for preferring, alternative policy options. METHODS: We assessed preferences among 4 policy options for research use of residual bloodspots through a bilingual national Internet survey of a representative sample of Canadians. Fifty percent of respondents were randomly assigned to select reasons supporting these preferences. Understanding of and attitudes toward screening and research concepts, and demographics were assessed. RESULTS: Of 1102 respondents (94% participation rate; 47% completion rate), the overall preference among policy options was ask permission (67%); this option was also the most acceptable choice (80%). Assume permission was acceptable to 46%, no permission required was acceptable to 29%, and no research allowed was acceptable to 26%. The acceptability of the ask permission option was reduced among participants assigned to the reasoning exercise (84% vs 76%; P = .004). Compared with assume/no permission required, ordered logistic regression showed a significant reduction in preference for the ask permission option with greater understanding of concepts (odds ratio, 0.87; P < .001), greater confidence in science (odds ratio, 0.16; P < .001), and a perceived responsibility to contribute to research (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Surveyed Canadians prefer that explicit permission is sought for storage and research use of NBS bloodspots. This preference was diminished when reasons supporting and opposing routine storage, and other policy options, were presented. Findings warrant consideration as NBS communities strategize to respond to shifting legislative contexts.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Subject

Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

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