The growing practice of returning individual results to research participants has revealed a variety of interpretations of the multiple and sometimes conflicting duties that researchers may owe to participants. One particularly difficult question is the nature and extent of a researcher’s duty to facilitate a participant’s follow-up clinical care by placing research results in the participant’s medical record. The question is especially difficult in the context of genomic research. Some recent genomic research studies — enrolling patients as participants — boldly (...) address the question with protocols dictating that researchers place research results directly into study participants’ existing medical records, without participant consent. Such privileging of researcher judgment over participant choice may be motivated by a desire to discharge a duty that researchers perceive themselves as owing to participants. However, the underlying ethical, professional, legal, and regulatory duties that would compel or justify this action have not been fully explored. (shrink)

Biobanking has become a global activity of growing relevance to research. The African continent is part of this global effort to collect, store and re-use samples and data. International research and capacity development efforts such as the Human Health and Heredity Africa project seek to empower African researchers and research participants alike. Given that African genetic diversity is a unique global resource, retaining samples and data on the continent is critical to building trust in communities who have been historically exploited (...) in the name of research. Diverse and multiple stakeholders are involved in biobanking. Engaging authentically with these various stakeholder groups is a pre-requisite to building trust. Likewise, establishing legitimacy of biobanks also contributes to development of trust in communities. This paper reflects on the concepts of trust, legitimacy and stakeholder engagement. Empirical research conducted on researchers in South Africa as well as on research participants and Community Advisory Board members is briefly presented. The development of educational pamphlets on genetics, genomics and biobanking and an educational video on biobanking in conjunction with CAB members is described. These tools were used to engage research participants and CAB members in discussions around biobanking. Establishing biobanks in African settings is challenging. However, efforts must be made to engage with relevant stakeholders on the basis of mutual respect and trust. (shrink)

The growing practice of returning individual results to research participants has revealed a variety of interpretations of the multiple and sometimes conflicting duties that researchers may owe to participants. One particularly difficult question is the nature and extent of a researcher’s duty to facilitate a participant’s follow-up clinical care by placing research results in the participant’s medical record. The question is especially difficult in the context of genomic research. Some recent genomic research studies — enrolling patients as participants — boldly (...) address the question with protocols dictating that researchers place research results directly into study participants’ existing medical records, without participant consent. Such privileging of researcher judgment over participant choice may be motivated by a desire to discharge a duty that researchers perceive themselves as owing to participants. However, the underlying ethical, professional, legal, and regulatory duties that would compel or justify this action have not been fully explored. (shrink)