乌干达艾滋病毒研究所参与者接受个体药物基因组学研究结果的决策和角色偏好。

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Sylvia Nabukenya, Catriona Waitt, Adelline Twimukye, Brian Mushabe, Barbara Castelnuovo, Stella Zawedde-Muyanja, Richard Muhindo, David Kyaddondo, Erisa S Mwaka
{"title":"乌干达艾滋病毒研究所参与者接受个体药物基因组学研究结果的决策和角色偏好。","authors":"Sylvia Nabukenya, Catriona Waitt, Adelline Twimukye, Brian Mushabe, Barbara Castelnuovo, Stella Zawedde-Muyanja, Richard Muhindo, David Kyaddondo, Erisa S Mwaka","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01181-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Little is known about how people living with HIV should be engaged in the decision-making process for returning individual pharmacogenomic research results. This study explored the role people living with HIV want to play in making decisions about whether and how individual results of pharmacogenomic research should be presented to them. A convergent parallel mixed methods study was conducted, comprising a survey of 221 research participants and five deliberative focus group discussions with 30 purposively selected research participants. Most participants (122, 55.2%) preferred the collaborative role, 67 (30.3%) preferred the active role and 32 (14.5%) preferred the passive role. Factors that significantly influenced preference for an active role compared with a collaborative role were marital status (OR: 0.282, p = 0.013), research experience (OR: 4.37, p = 0.028), and religion (OR: 2.346, p = 0.041). The reasons proffered for the active role included prior experience with antiretroviral treatment and increased exposure to research activities. The reasons given for preferring the passive role included limited level of awareness about the interaction between patients' genes and drugs, trust in researchers to make the right decision, and fear of making decisions with harmful implications. Overall, findings from our study show that participants want to be engaged in the decision-making process. Research teams ought to provide adequate and simple information about the pharmacogenomic research and implications of the results to support participants' informed decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11806758/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decision-making and role preferences for receiving individual pharmacogenomic research results among participants at a Ugandan HIV research institute.\",\"authors\":\"Sylvia Nabukenya, Catriona Waitt, Adelline Twimukye, Brian Mushabe, Barbara Castelnuovo, Stella Zawedde-Muyanja, Richard Muhindo, David Kyaddondo, Erisa S Mwaka\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12910-025-01181-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Little is known about how people living with HIV should be engaged in the decision-making process for returning individual pharmacogenomic research results. This study explored the role people living with HIV want to play in making decisions about whether and how individual results of pharmacogenomic research should be presented to them. A convergent parallel mixed methods study was conducted, comprising a survey of 221 research participants and five deliberative focus group discussions with 30 purposively selected research participants. Most participants (122, 55.2%) preferred the collaborative role, 67 (30.3%) preferred the active role and 32 (14.5%) preferred the passive role. Factors that significantly influenced preference for an active role compared with a collaborative role were marital status (OR: 0.282, p = 0.013), research experience (OR: 4.37, p = 0.028), and religion (OR: 2.346, p = 0.041). The reasons proffered for the active role included prior experience with antiretroviral treatment and increased exposure to research activities. The reasons given for preferring the passive role included limited level of awareness about the interaction between patients' genes and drugs, trust in researchers to make the right decision, and fear of making decisions with harmful implications. Overall, findings from our study show that participants want to be engaged in the decision-making process. Research teams ought to provide adequate and simple information about the pharmacogenomic research and implications of the results to support participants' informed decisions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11806758/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Medical Ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01181-w\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01181-w","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对于艾滋病毒感染者应该如何参与返回个人药物基因组学研究结果的决策过程,人们知之甚少。这项研究探讨了艾滋病毒感染者在决定是否以及如何向他们展示药物基因组学研究的个人结果时想要扮演的角色。采用融合平行混合方法进行研究,包括对221名研究参与者的调查和5次有目的选择的30名研究参与者的审议焦点小组讨论。大多数参与者(122人,55.2%)选择合作角色,67人(30.3%)选择主动角色,32人(14.5%)选择被动角色。婚姻状况(OR: 0.282, p = 0.013)、研究经验(OR: 4.37, p = 0.028)和宗教信仰(OR: 2.346, p = 0.041)是影响积极角色偏好与协作角色偏好的显著因素。所提供的积极作用的理由包括以前获得抗逆转录病毒治疗的经验和更多地接触研究活动。选择被动角色的原因包括对患者基因和药物之间相互作用的认识水平有限,相信研究人员会做出正确的决定,以及害怕做出有害的决定。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,参与者希望参与决策过程。研究团队应该提供关于药物基因组学研究和结果含义的充分和简单的信息,以支持参与者的知情决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Decision-making and role preferences for receiving individual pharmacogenomic research results among participants at a Ugandan HIV research institute.

Little is known about how people living with HIV should be engaged in the decision-making process for returning individual pharmacogenomic research results. This study explored the role people living with HIV want to play in making decisions about whether and how individual results of pharmacogenomic research should be presented to them. A convergent parallel mixed methods study was conducted, comprising a survey of 221 research participants and five deliberative focus group discussions with 30 purposively selected research participants. Most participants (122, 55.2%) preferred the collaborative role, 67 (30.3%) preferred the active role and 32 (14.5%) preferred the passive role. Factors that significantly influenced preference for an active role compared with a collaborative role were marital status (OR: 0.282, p = 0.013), research experience (OR: 4.37, p = 0.028), and religion (OR: 2.346, p = 0.041). The reasons proffered for the active role included prior experience with antiretroviral treatment and increased exposure to research activities. The reasons given for preferring the passive role included limited level of awareness about the interaction between patients' genes and drugs, trust in researchers to make the right decision, and fear of making decisions with harmful implications. Overall, findings from our study show that participants want to be engaged in the decision-making process. Research teams ought to provide adequate and simple information about the pharmacogenomic research and implications of the results to support participants' informed decisions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
×
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