Discover Community Create You

Loading publication...

Noodle always counts identifier-free feature events for service operation. With your permission, Google Analytics can also estimate audience and engagement. Search text, publication identifiers, cookies, IP addresses and browser fingerprints are never included in Noodle's first-party event counters.

Privacy details

Article

Stakeholder Perspectives on Returning Nonactionable Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) Genetic Results to African American Research Participants.

Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE - 1 Jan 2000

West Kathleen M, Cavanaugh Kerri L, Blacksher Erika, Fullerton Stephanie M, Umeukeje Ebele M, Young Bessie, Burke Wylie

Abstract excerpt

The ethics of returning nonactionable genetic research results to individuals are unclear. Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) genetic variants are nonactionable, predominantly found in people of West African ancestry, and contribute to kidney disease disparities. To inform ethical research practice, we interviewed researchers, clinicians, and African American community members (n = 76) about the potential risks and...

Read the complete abstract on PubMed

Topics

Share this publication in a Topic to start or enrich a Post.

Share to Apolipoprotein L1
Share to Black or African American

Methodology Data sources Editorial policy Privacy About Contact Helena Bioinformatics

Share to Genetic Predisposition to Disease

Share to Genetic Testing

Share to Kidney Transplantation

Source

Open in PubMed Open full text

Identifiers

PMID: 34870514
DOI: 10.1177/15562646211063267
PMCID: PMC9053332

Provenance

PubMed metadata and Literature Corpus relationships. Corpus snapshot updated 4 Sept 2026.

Related research

Semantic proximity does not establish scientific evidence.

Research trail→

Click a neighbor to travelStep 1 · 12 closest

Stakeholder Perspectives on Returning Nonactionable Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) Genetic Results to African American Research Participants.PMID 34870514Read ↗

At the Research-Clinical Interface: Returning Individual Genetic Results to Research Participants.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Attitudes of nearly 7000 health professionals, genomic researchers and publics toward the return of incidental results from sequencing researchSemantic proximity Read ↗

An Alaska Native community’s views on genetic research, testing, and return of results: Results from a public deliberationSemantic proximity Read ↗

Attitudes of African Americans Toward Return of Results From Exome and Whole Genome SequencingSemantic proximity Read ↗

Race, Genomics and Chronic Disease: What Patients with African Ancestry Have to SaySemantic proximity Read ↗

Primary Care Providers’ Perspectives on Receiving Tier 1 Genomic Results from a National Study – the Million Veteran Program Return Of Actionable Results (MVP-ROAR) StudySemantic proximity Read ↗

Effects of Testing and Disclosing Ancestry-Specific Genetic Risk for Kidney Failure on Patients and Health Care Professionals: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Intentions to Donate to a Biobank in a National Sample of African AmericansSemantic proximity Read ↗

To disclose, or not to disclose? Perspectives of clinical genomics professionals toward returning incidental findings from genomic researchSemantic proximity Read ↗

Return of Results in a Global Sample of Psychiatric Genetics Researchers: Practices, Attitudes, and KnowledgeSemantic proximity Read ↗

Additional findings from the 100,000 Genomes Project: A qualitative study of recipient perspectives.Semantic proximity Read ↗

Research participants' perspectives on genotype-driven research recruitment.Semantic proximity Read ↗

⌁Select a neighboring publication to make it the new centre.