4.6 Article

Voluntary participation and informed consent to international genetic research

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 96, Issue 11, Pages 1989-1995

Publisher

AMER PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOC INC
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2005.076232

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FIC NIH HHS [T37 TW000041, R25 TW007091, 3T37TW00041-03S2] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NCRR NIH HHS [G12 RR003048, RR03048] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NHGRI NIH HHS [HG02207, R01 HG002207, U54 HG006947] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives. We compared voluntary participation and comprehension of informed consent among individuals of African ancestry enrolled in similarly designed genetic studies of hypertension in the United States and Nigeria. Methods. Survey questionnaires were used to evaluate factors associated with voluntariness (the number of people volunteering) and understanding of the study's genetic purpose. A total of 655 individuals (United States: 348; Nigeria: 307) were interviewed after participation in the genetic studies. Results. Most US respondents (99%), compared with 72% of Nigerian respondents, reported being told the study purpose. Fewer than half of the respondents at both sites reported that the study purpose was to learn about genetic inheritance of hypertension. Most respondents indicated that their participation was voluntary. In the United States, 97% reported that they could withdraw, compared with 67% in Nigeria. In Nigeria, nearly half the married women reported asking permission from husbands to enroll in the hypertension study; no respondents sought permission from local elders to participate in the study. Conclusions. Our findings highlight the need for more effective approaches and interventions to improve comprehension of consent for genetic research among ethnically and linguistically diverse populations in all settings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available