216 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23169494)
1. A tiered-layered-staged model for informed consent in personal genome testing.
Bunnik EM; Janssens AC; Schermer MH
Eur J Hum Genet; 2013 Jun; 21(6):596-601. PubMed ID: 23169494
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Informed consent in direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: the outline of a model between specific and generic consent.
Bunnik EM; Janssens AC; Schermer MH
Bioethics; 2014 Sep; 28(7):343-51. PubMed ID: 23137034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Consent to 'personal' genomics and privacy. Direct-to-consumer genetic tests and population genome research challenge traditional notions of privacy and consent.
Knoppers BM
EMBO Rep; 2010 Jun; 11(6):416-9. PubMed ID: 20448662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Personal genome testing: test characteristics to clarify the discourse on ethical, legal and societal issues.
Bunnik EM; Schermer MH; Janssens AC
BMC Med Ethics; 2011 Jun; 12():11. PubMed ID: 21672210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The new genetics and informed consent: differentiating choice to preserve autonomy.
Bunnik EM; de Jong A; Nijsingh N; de Wert GM
Bioethics; 2013 Jul; 27(6):348-55. PubMed ID: 23718722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Development of a tiered and binned genetic counseling model for informed consent in the era of multiplex testing for cancer susceptibility.
Bradbury AR; Patrick-Miller L; Long J; Powers J; Stopfer J; Forman A; Rybak C; Mattie K; Brandt A; Chambers R; Chung WK; Churpek J; Daly MB; Digiovanni L; Farengo-Clark D; Fetzer D; Ganschow P; Grana G; Gulden C; Hall M; Kohler L; Maxwell K; Merrill S; Montgomery S; Mueller R; Nielsen S; Olopade O; Rainey K; Seelaus C; Nathanson KL; Domchek SM
Genet Med; 2015 Jun; 17(6):485-92. PubMed ID: 25297947
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: ethical and regulatory issues that arise from wanting to 'know' your DNA.
Samuel GN; Jordens CF; Kerridge I
Intern Med J; 2010 Mar; 40(3):220-4. PubMed ID: 20446967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Customers or research participants? Guidance for research practices in commercialization of personal genomics.
Tobin SL; Cho MK; Lee SS; Magnus DC; Allyse M; Ormond KE; Garrison NA
Genet Med; 2012 Oct; 14(10):833-5. PubMed ID: 22699154
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Tensions in ethics and policy created by National Precision Medicine Programs.
Minari J; Brothers KB; Morrison M
Hum Genomics; 2018 Apr; 12(1):22. PubMed ID: 29665847
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Mainstreaming informed consent for genomic sequencing: A call for action.
Bunnik EM; Dondorp WJ; Bredenoord AL; de Wert G; Cornel MC
Eur J Cancer; 2021 May; 148():405-410. PubMed ID: 33784533
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. The role of disease characteristics in the ethical debate on personal genome testing.
Bunnik EM; Schermer MH; Janssens AC
BMC Med Genomics; 2012 Jan; 5():4. PubMed ID: 22260407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Personal genomic testing for nutrition and wellness in Australia: A content analysis of online information.
Tutty E; Hickerton C; Adamski MM; Metcalfe SA
Nutr Diet; 2019 Jul; 76(3):263-270. PubMed ID: 30693631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Moving from 'fully' to 'appropriately' informed consent in genomics: The PROMICE framework.
Koplin JJ; Gyngell C; Savulescu J; Vears DF
Bioethics; 2022 Jul; 36(6):655-665. PubMed ID: 35390218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Content Analysis of Informed Consent for Whole Genome Sequencing Offered by Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Companies.
Niemiec E; Borry P; Pinxten W; Howard HC
Hum Mutat; 2016 Dec; 37(12):1248-1256. PubMed ID: 27647801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Balancing Benefits and Risks of Immortal Data: Participants' Views of Open Consent in the Personal Genome Project.
Zarate OA; Brody JG; Brown P; Ramirez-Andreotta MD; Perovich L; Matz J
Hastings Cent Rep; 2016; 46(1):36-45. PubMed ID: 26678513
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Direct-to-consumer genomics and research ethics: should a more robust informed consent process be included?
Wasson K
Am J Bioeth; 2009; 9(6-7):56-8. PubMed ID: 19998119
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. RECONCEPTUALIZING CONSENT FOR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER HEALTH SERVICES.
Spector-Bagdady K
Am J Law Med; 2015; 41(4):568-616. PubMed ID: 26863850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Rethinking counselling in prenatal screening: An ethical analysis of informed consent in the context of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT).
Kater-Kuipers A; de Beaufort ID; Galjaard RH; Bunnik EM
Bioethics; 2020 Sep; 34(7):671-678. PubMed ID: 32621525
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Old Challenges or New Issues? Genetic Health Professionals' Experiences Obtaining Informed Consent in Diagnostic Genomic Sequencing.
Vears DF; Borry P; Savulescu J; Koplin JJ
AJOB Empir Bioeth; 2021; 12(1):12-23. PubMed ID: 33017265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Current ethical and legal issues in health-related direct-to-consumer genetic testing.
Niemiec E; Kalokairinou L; Howard HC
Per Med; 2017 Sep; 14(5):433-445. PubMed ID: 29754566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
