Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCarrieri, D
dc.contributor.authorHoward, HC
dc.contributor.authorBenjamin, C
dc.contributor.authorClarke, AJ
dc.contributor.authorDheensa, S
dc.contributor.authorDoheny, S
dc.contributor.authorHawkins, N
dc.contributor.authorHalbersma-Konings, TF
dc.contributor.authorJackson, L
dc.contributor.authorKayserili, H
dc.contributor.authorKelly, SE
dc.contributor.authorLucassen, AM
dc.contributor.authorMendes, Á
dc.contributor.authorRial-Sebbag, E
dc.contributor.authorStefánsdóttir, V
dc.contributor.authorTurnpenny, PD
dc.contributor.authorvan El, CG
dc.contributor.authorvan Langen, IM
dc.contributor.authorCornel, MC
dc.contributor.authorForzano, F
dc.contributor.authorEuropean Society of Human Genetics
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-19T10:10:37Z
dc.date.issued2018-10-11
dc.description.abstractTechnological advances have increased the availability of genomic data in research and the clinic. If, over time, interpretation of the significance of the data changes, or new information becomes available, the question arises as to whether recontacting the patient and/or family is indicated. The Public and Professional Policy Committee of the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG), together with research groups from the UK and the Netherlands, developed recommendations on recontacting which, after public consultation, have been endorsed by ESHG Board. In clinical genetics, recontacting for updating patients with new, clinically significant information related to their diagnosis or previous genetic testing may be justifiable and, where possible, desirable. Consensus about the type of information that should trigger recontacting converges around its clinical and personal utility. The organization of recontacting procedures and policies in current health care systems is challenging. It should be sustainable, commensurate with previously obtained consent, and a shared responsibility between healthcare providers, laboratories, patients, and other stakeholders. Optimal use of the limited clinical resources currently available is needed. Allocation of dedicated resources for recontacting should be considered. Finally, there is a need for more evidence, including economic and utility of information for people, to inform which strategies provide the most cost-effective use of healthcare resources for recontacting.en_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 11 October 2018en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/s41431-018-0285-1
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/34356
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherSpringer Nature for European Society of Human Geneticsen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30310124en_GB
dc.rights© 2018 The Author(s). Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.en_GB
dc.titleRecontacting patients in clinical genetics services: recommendations of the European Society of Human Geneticsen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2018-10-19T10:10:37Z
exeter.place-of-publicationEnglanden_GB
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Freely available on open access from Springer Nature via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalEuropean Journal of Human Geneticsen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record