Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 17, 2025

Using Cholesky Decomposition to Explore Individual Differences in Longitudinal Relations between Reading Skills
Published on: September 17, 2019
Implementing secondary findings analysis in a genetic and environmental research study
Jennifer J Johnston1, Julie C Sapp1, Seeley Yoo1
1Center for Precision Health Research, National Human Genome Research Institute, NIH, Bethesda, MD.
Returning secondary findings (SFs) from genetic research is complex. While many participants consent, less than half receive results due to declines or delays, highlighting a need for optimized outreach.
Area of Science:
- Genomics
- Clinical Genetics
- Bioethics
Background:
- Research studies generate secondary findings (SFs) with potential health implications.
- Returning SFs involves complex logistical and ethical considerations.
- Understanding participant engagement with SF return is crucial for optimizing research practices.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate the complexities and challenges associated with returning secondary findings (SFs) in a research setting.
- To analyze the rate of successful return of SFs and factors influencing participant uptake.
- To identify strategies for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of SF return processes.
Main Methods:
- Generated genome sequences for 4737 participants in a health study.
- Obtained consent for SF return from 4630 participants.
- Classified variants using established American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics/Association for Molecular Pathology criteria with ClinGen modifications.
Main Results:
- Eighty-six variants were eligible for return to 102 participants.
- Average time to initial recontact was 5.8 years; 95 individuals were reached.
- Results were returned to 57 participants; significant proportions declined or were lost to follow-up.
- Return of results was positively associated with education status (P = .0035).
Conclusions:
- High initial interest in SFs contrasts with a lower rate of actual result delivery.
- A substantial proportion of participants who consented later declined SF receipt.
- Optimizing SF return requires minimizing return time and tailoring outreach based on education level.
More Related Videos
09:35A Protocol for Using Gene Set Enrichment Analysis to Identify the Appropriate Animal Model for Translational Research
Published on: August 16, 2017
09:34Targeted Next-generation Sequencing and Bioinformatics Pipeline to Evaluate Genetic Determinants of Constitutional Disease
Published on: April 4, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Behavioral Genetics and Its Designs
The primary methodologies used in behavior genetics include family studies, twin studies, and adoption studies, each providing unique...
Genome-wide Association Studies-GWAS
GWAS does not require the identification of the target gene involved in...
Gene-Environment Interactions
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Background and Environment Affect Phenotype
An example of how genetic background affects phenotype can be seen in horses. The Extension gene in horses is responsible for their coat color. A wild-type gene (EE) produces black pigment in the coat, while a mutant gene (ee) produces red pigment. A...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...