ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2025
Returning raw genomic data to research participants in a pediatric cancer precision medicine trial.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In pediatric cancer precision medicine clinical trials settings, parents proactively seeking treatment and answers to causation may request return of their child's raw data and/or biospecimen. To satisfy such requests, the ZERO Childhood Cancer Program required a guidance document. Literature review led to Version(V)1; Delphi consultation with 21/54 invited experts (V2-4) and parent consultations (V5-6). A final V7 was approved for implementation: Policy (purpose; background; ethical considerations), Process (nine steps), and consent form. Issues addressed included: child's best interests, clinical utility, non-maleficence, reciprocity between researchers and participants/parents; responsibility to genetic relatives; acknowledging potential value of subsequent analysis/interpretation but no obligation on treating clinicians to act on therapeutic recommendations arising; practical barriers to return; and supporting parental empowerment by facilitating meeting with a study genetic counselor, separate from their treating clinician, if preferred, to manage their request. This guide may be a model for other research groups and inform ethical guidelines.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.