What are our AIMs? Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Use of Ancestry Estimation in Disease Research.

Joon-Ho Yu, Janelle S Taylor, Karen L Edwards, Stephanie M Fullerton
{"title":"What are our AIMs? Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Use of Ancestry Estimation in Disease Research.","authors":"Joon-Ho Yu, Janelle S Taylor, Karen L Edwards, Stephanie M Fullerton","doi":"10.1080/21507716.2012.717339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ancestry estimation serves as a tool to identify genetic contributions to disease but may contribute to racial discrimination and stigmatization. We sought to understand user perspectives on the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation to inform research practice and contribute to debates about the use of race and ancestry in genetics.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Key informant interviews with 22 scientists were conducted to examine scientists' understandings of the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three main perspectives were observed among key informant scientists who use ancestry estimation in genetic epidemiology research. Population geneticists self identified as educators who controlled the meaning and application of ancestry estimation in research. Clinician-researchers were optimistic about the application of ancestry estimation to individualized risk assessment and personalized medicine. Epidemiologists remained ambivalent toward ancestry estimation and suggested a continued role for race in their research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed an imbalance of control over the meaning and application of ancestry estimation among disciplines that may result in unwarranted or premature translation of ancestry estimation into medicine and public health. Differences in disciplinary perspectives need to be addressed if translational benefits of genetic ancestry estimation are to be realized.</p>","PeriodicalId":89316,"journal":{"name":"AJOB primary research","volume":"3 4","pages":"87-97"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4238888/pdf/nihms592671.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB primary research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2012.717339","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Ancestry estimation serves as a tool to identify genetic contributions to disease but may contribute to racial discrimination and stigmatization. We sought to understand user perspectives on the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation to inform research practice and contribute to debates about the use of race and ancestry in genetics.

Methods: Key informant interviews with 22 scientists were conducted to examine scientists' understandings of the benefits and harms of ancestry estimation.

Results: Three main perspectives were observed among key informant scientists who use ancestry estimation in genetic epidemiology research. Population geneticists self identified as educators who controlled the meaning and application of ancestry estimation in research. Clinician-researchers were optimistic about the application of ancestry estimation to individualized risk assessment and personalized medicine. Epidemiologists remained ambivalent toward ancestry estimation and suggested a continued role for race in their research.

Conclusions: We observed an imbalance of control over the meaning and application of ancestry estimation among disciplines that may result in unwarranted or premature translation of ancestry estimation into medicine and public health. Differences in disciplinary perspectives need to be addressed if translational benefits of genetic ancestry estimation are to be realized.

我们的 AIMs 是什么?疾病研究中使用祖先估计的跨学科视角。
背景:祖先估计是确定遗传对疾病影响的一种工具,但可能会造成种族歧视和污名化。我们试图了解用户对祖先估计的益处和害处的看法,以便为研究实践提供参考,并为有关在遗传学中使用种族和祖先的辩论做出贡献:对 22 位科学家进行了关键信息访谈,以考察科学家对祖先估计的益处和害处的理解:在遗传流行病学研究中使用祖先估计的关键信息提供者科学家主要有三种观点。人口遗传学家自我认同为教育者,他们控制着祖先估计在研究中的意义和应用。临床研究人员对祖先估计在个体化风险评估和个性化医疗中的应用持乐观态度。流行病学家对祖先估计仍持矛盾态度,并表示种族在他们的研究中将继续发挥作用:我们观察到,各学科对祖先估计的意义和应用的控制不平衡,这可能会导致祖先估计不必要或过早地转化为医学和公共卫生。如果要实现遗传祖先估计的转化效益,就必须解决学科观点的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信