No abstract

No abstract

Data withholding occurs in academic genetics and it affects essential scientific activities such as the ability to confirm published results. Lack of resources and issues of scientific priority may play an important role in scientists' decisions to withhold data, materials, and information from other academic geneticists.

The results suggest that knowledge of genetics and genetic tests is increasing among physicians, particularly among more recent graduates and physicians who are exposed to genetics problems in their practices, but deficiencies remain. Although a medical school course in genetics may improve knowledge, it is not sufficient. Greater emphasis is needed at all levels of medical education to reduce the chance of physician error as more genetic tests become available.

Data withholding is common in biomedical science, takes multiple forms, is influenced by a variety of characteristics of investigators and their training, and varies by field of science. Encouraging openness during the formative experiences of young investigators may be critical to increased data sharing, but the effects of formal training do not appear straightforward.

Purpose: While the mode of inheritance of a genetic condition has long been considered to have not only medical, but also psychosocial consequences for families, this supposition has never been tested. Methods: We surveyed 112 members of 51 families (59% response) with chronic granulomatous disease to determine the influence of mode of inheritance on parents', siblings', and patients' (1) knowledge of inheritance and reproductive risk; (2) concern about risk to future family-members; (3) feelings of guilt and blame; and (4) feelings of stigmatization.Ninety-six members of 51 families (49% response) with Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy and spinal muscular atrophy types II/III were also studied. Results: X-linked families had better understanding of inheritance (P Ͻ 0.001) and reproductive risks (P Ͻ 0.01). X-linked mothers worried more about risks to future generations; other autosomal-recessive family members were as worried. X-linked mothers were more likely to feel guilty (P Ͻ 0.01) and blame themselves (P Ͻ 0.001). X-linked fathers blamed their child's mother (P Ͻ 0.05) and X-linked mothers felt more blamed by the father (P Ͻ 0.01). X-linked family-members were more likely to consider being a carrier stigmatizing (P Ͻ 0.05). Conclusion: When providing genetic counseling, attention should be given to guilt and blame in X-linked families and understanding reproductive risks in autosomal recessive families. Genet Med 2006: 8(4):234-242.

The Task Force on Genetic Testing was created to review genetic testing in the United States and, when necessary, to make recommendations to ensure the development of safe and effective genetic tests. A survey to explore the state of genetic testing was undertaken for the Task Force and completed in early 1995. The survey, as well as literature reports and other information collected for the Task Force, showed problems affecting safety and effectiveness, as defined by the Task Force: validity and utility of predictive tests, laboratory quality, and appropriate use by healthcare providers and consumers. On the basis of these findings, the Task Force made several recommendations to ensure safe and effective genetic testing. The Secretary of Health and Human Services followed up one recommendation by creating the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. One of its functions will be to implement other recommendations of the Task Force.

No abstract