Yves Saint James Aquino, Joanne Scarfe, Diana Popic, Lucy Carolan, Chris Degeling, Kathleen Prokopovich, Margaret F. A. Otlowski, Saniya Singh, Belinda Fabrianesi, Kaustuv Bhattacharya, Kristi Jones, Ainsley J. Newson, Patti Shih, Bruce Bennetts, Emma Frost, Zornitza L. Stark, Kristen Nowak, Louise Healy, Sarah Norris, Stacy M. Carter
{"title":"Genomic Newborn Screening: Verdict From an Australian Citizens’ Jury","authors":"Yves Saint James Aquino, Joanne Scarfe, Diana Popic, Lucy Carolan, Chris Degeling, Kathleen Prokopovich, Margaret F. A. Otlowski, Saniya Singh, Belinda Fabrianesi, Kaustuv Bhattacharya, Kristi Jones, Ainsley J. Newson, Patti Shih, Bruce Bennetts, Emma Frost, Zornitza L. Stark, Kristen Nowak, Louise Healy, Sarah Norris, Stacy M. Carter","doi":"10.5694/mja2.70184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>To support a nationally representative group of Australians to make informed, reasoned recommendations on the use of genomics in newborn screening programmes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Design</h3>\n \n <p>Hybrid Citizens’ Jury method.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Setting, Participants</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty Australian adults recruited by random ballot invitation and stratified selection against population-based demographic targets of age, sex, ancestry, highest level of education, location of residence (state/territory, urban/non-urban), experience of disability and parent/non-parent.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Main Outcome Measures</h3>\n \n <p>Jury recommendations with reasons.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>The jury made 11 recommendations. The jury agreed whole genome sequencing could be used in the programme, but only if conditions were met regarding national consistency, benefit, Australian Government oversight, consent, reporting to parents, data protection, supporting parents and the healthcare system, and parent and public education. All of these conditions were agreed by consensus, except reporting to parents and parent and public education, where there was a supermajority (24/30) in agreement and minority dissent. The jury were split on Recommendation 11: how much genomic data should be extracted and retained. Nine jurors supported whole genome sequencing only if data extraction and retention were limited to interpretable, actionable genetic information; 21 jurors supported a more expansive approach.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>To maintain public trust in Australian newborn screening, programmes should take a more conservative approach to data extraction and storage until concerns are addressed and safeguarding conditions implemented. Jurors' key concerns include identifiability of genomic data, risk of data misuse and potential to undermine trust and participation in newborn screening.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":18214,"journal":{"name":"Medical Journal of Australia","volume":"224 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13066916/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Journal of Australia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.5694/mja2.70184","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To support a nationally representative group of Australians to make informed, reasoned recommendations on the use of genomics in newborn screening programmes.
Design
Hybrid Citizens’ Jury method.
Setting, Participants
Thirty Australian adults recruited by random ballot invitation and stratified selection against population-based demographic targets of age, sex, ancestry, highest level of education, location of residence (state/territory, urban/non-urban), experience of disability and parent/non-parent.
Main Outcome Measures
Jury recommendations with reasons.
Results
The jury made 11 recommendations. The jury agreed whole genome sequencing could be used in the programme, but only if conditions were met regarding national consistency, benefit, Australian Government oversight, consent, reporting to parents, data protection, supporting parents and the healthcare system, and parent and public education. All of these conditions were agreed by consensus, except reporting to parents and parent and public education, where there was a supermajority (24/30) in agreement and minority dissent. The jury were split on Recommendation 11: how much genomic data should be extracted and retained. Nine jurors supported whole genome sequencing only if data extraction and retention were limited to interpretable, actionable genetic information; 21 jurors supported a more expansive approach.
Conclusions
To maintain public trust in Australian newborn screening, programmes should take a more conservative approach to data extraction and storage until concerns are addressed and safeguarding conditions implemented. Jurors' key concerns include identifiability of genomic data, risk of data misuse and potential to undermine trust and participation in newborn screening.
期刊介绍:
The Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) stands as Australia's foremost general medical journal, leading the dissemination of high-quality research and commentary to shape health policy and influence medical practices within the country. Under the leadership of Professor Virginia Barbour, the expert editorial team at MJA is dedicated to providing authors with a constructive and collaborative peer-review and publication process. Established in 1914, the MJA has evolved into a modern journal that upholds its founding values, maintaining a commitment to supporting the medical profession by delivering high-quality and pertinent information essential to medical practice.