Abstract
Background
Genetic variation research (GVR) may raise concerns about misuse of information and discrimination. Seemingly contradictory positive views about GVR have also been reported.
Objective
To dissect this inconsistency, our objectives were to: (1) explore open-ended views of GVR and (2) quantify views of and willingness to participate in GVR by race.
Design
Cross-sectional study.
Participants
801 African-American and white prior participants in a case-control genetic epidemiology study of colon cancer risks (NCCCS).
Measures
Qualitative measures evaluated responses to questions about good and bad things about GVR. Quantitative measures evaluated positive and negative perceptions, perceptions of discrimination, and likelihood of future participation by race.
Results
Open-ended queries about GVR resulted in few “negative” responses. In closed-ended questions, however, African Americans were more likely to feel that such research would: result in higher insurance (41% vs. 30%, p = 0.008), not benefit minorities (29% vs. 14%, p=<0.001), reinforce racism (32% vs. 20%, p = 0.002), and use minorities as guinea pigs (27% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). Overall, after adjustment for potential confounding factors, African-American race remained inversely associated with feeling “very positive” about GVR (46% vs. 57%, p = 0.035). In contrast, African Americans were as likely as whites to express willingness to participate in future GVR studies (46%).
Conclusions
Open-ended questions about GVR were unlikely to spontaneously generate “negative” responses. In contrast, when presented specific examples of potentially negative implications, more respondents agreed, and minorities were more likely to express concerns. This suggests that while participants appear generally positive about GVR, their inability to articulate views regarding these complex concepts may require that researchers engage lay audiences, ensure accurate understanding, and provide them with language to express concerns.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Tate S, Goldstein D. Will tomorrow’s medicines work for everyone? Nature Genetics Supplement. 2004;36(11):534–42. November
Bloche G. Race-Based Therapeutics. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(20):2035–7. November 11
Bamshad M, Wooding S, Salisbury B, Stephens C. Deconstructuring the relationship between genetics and race. Nat Rev, Genet. 2004;5:596–609. August.
Condit C, Parrott R, Bates B, Bevan J, Achter P. Exploration of the impact of messages about genes and race on lay attitudes. Clin Genet. 2004;66:402–8.
Foster M, Sharp R. Beyond race: towards a whole-genome perspetive on human populations and genetic variation. Nat Rev, Genet. 2004;5:790–6. October
Goodman A. Why Genes Don’t Count (for Racial Differences in Health). Am J Public Health. November 2000;90(11):1699–702.
Shields A, Fortun M, Hammonds E, et al. The Use of Race Variables in Genetic Studies of Complex Traits and the Goal of Reducing Health Disparities. Am Psychol. 2005;60(1):77–103. January
Sankar P, Cho MK, Condit CM, et al. Genetic research and health disparities. JAMA. 2004;291(24):2985–9. Jun 23
Sterling R, Henderson GE, Corbie-Smith G. Public willingness to participate in and public opinions about genetic variation research: a review of the literature. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(11):1971–8. Nov
Bates BR, Lynch JA, Bevan JL, Condit CM. Warranted concerns, warranted outlooks: a focus group study of public understandings of genetic research. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60(2):331–44. Jan
Dickson D. Public views genetic research cautiously. Nat Med. 2001;7(4):391. Apr
Furr LA. Perceptions of genetics research as harmful to society: differences among samples of African-Americans and European-Americans.[see comment]. Genetic Testing. 2002;6(1):25–30.
Haddow G, Laurie G, Cunningham-Burley S, Hunter KG. Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research: a modest interdisciplinary proposal. Soc Sci Med. 2007;64(2):272–82. Jan
Lassen J, Jamison A. Genetic technologies meet the public: the discourses of concern. Science Technology & Human Values. 2006;31(1):8–28. Jan
Schulz A, Caldwell C, Foster S. What are they going to do with the information? Latino/Latina and African American Perspectives on the Human Genome Project. Health Educ Behav. 2003;30(2):151–69. April
Siang S. Americans Concernced About Ethics, Morality of Scientific Research, Survey Shows. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2001;93(24):1841. December 19
Henderson BJ, Maguire BT. Three lay models of disease inheritance. Soc Sci Med. 2000;50:293–301.
Achter P, Parrott R, Silk K. African Americans’ opinions about human-genetics research. Polit Life Sci. 2004;23(1):60–6. Mar
Corbie-Smith G. The continuing legacy of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study: considerations for clinical investigation.[see comment]. Am J Medical Sciences. 1999;317(1):5–8. Jan
Bevan J, Lynch J, Dubriwny T, et al. Informed lay preferences for delivery of racially varied pharmacogenomics. Genet Med. 2003;5(5):393–9. Sept/Oct
Condit C. How the public understands genetics Non-deterministic and non-discrimanatory interpretations of the "blueprint" metaphor. Pub Understand Sci. 1999;8:169–80.
Foster M, Sharp R, Freeman W, Chino M, Bernsten D, Carter T. The Role of Community Review in Evaluating the Risks of Human Genetic Variation Research. Am J Hum Genet. 1999;64:1719–27. May 4
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the NIH-NHGRI grant 1-R01-HG002830. This project was also supported by grant no. P50HG004488 from the National Human Genome Research Institute.
Conflict of Interest
None disclosed.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bussey-Jones, J., Henderson, G., Garrett, J. et al. Asking the Right Questions: Views on Genetic Variation Research Among Black and White Research Participants. J GEN INTERN MED 24, 299–304 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0883-7
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0883-7