SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Research”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2025

Autism ableism seen through research abstract contents: A mixed-methods analysis of language in NIH-funded genetic and genomic autism research.

In recent years, genetic and genomic autism research has come under increasing scrutiny, moving to the center of debates about ableism, neurodiversity, autism acceptance, and the future of research and care. At the same time, both autism research and genetics and genomics research have, as fields, begun to reckon with the significance of the language researchers use in the course of their work and the harmful ideas that may thereby be reinforced. Although the language of research cannot be assumed to straightforwardly correspond to individual researchers' beliefs, the presence of widespread ableist language may indicate structural and institutionalized ableism, including ableist assumptions at the foundations of research. We conducted a mixed-methods analysis of 166 genetic and genomic autism research projects funded by the US National Institutes of Health, in order to understand the prevalence of potentially ableist discourse, language, and stigmatizing language about autistic people. We found that such discourse and language was ubiquitous across our sample, including a discourse of prevention. This study lends empirical evidence to current debates about language in autism research. Evaluating language can prompt researchers and institutions to reflect on how they conceptualize, design, discuss, and pursue their work.Lay abstractGenetic research about autism is controversial. Researchers are starting to think more carefully about the words they use to talk about autism and the way they do their research. Past research has found that researchers sometimes write about autism in ableist ways. This means that they write about autistic people as though they are less important than nonautistic people. We looked at the way genetics researchers have written about autism in the paperwork for their research. We found that they often write about autistic people in an ableist way. We think that researchers should think carefully about the way they write about autistic people, and how they plan and do their research.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Underrepresented populations in genomic research: a qualitative study of researchers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The lack of diversity in genomic data limits researchers' ability to investigate the relationships between genetic profiles, disease manifestations, and responses to new therapies. As a result, innovations in treatment could have potentially harmful effects on a significant portion of the population due to incomplete or inaccurate genomic data. In addition, the lack of harmonization in the use of population descriptors in genomic studies raises both ethical and scientific concerns regarding which descriptors should be used to study and recruit underrepresented populations. Therefore, understanding the factors contributing to the lack of diversity in genomic research is an urgent scientific, clinical, and public health priority. This study aims to explore the social and contextual factors influencing the participation of underrepresented populations in genomic research, from the perspective of researchers in the field. METHODS: A total of 13 semi-structured interviews were conducted with researchers experienced in genomic research in Canada and fluent in either French or English. The interview transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Researchers identified several factors contributing to the low participation of underrepresented populations in genomic research, with one key factor being the geographic distribution of research institutions and the disconnect between research efforts and the communities being studied. To address this issue, participants stressed the importance of moving away from colonial practices, such as conducting research on a community without consulting its members in the design phase. Furthermore, it was suggested that existing diversity, equity, and inclusion policies alone were insufficient to effectively address the challenge. Lastly, the study also highlighted a potential link between how study populations are categorized and the willingness of underrepresented groups to participate in genomic research. CONCLUSION: Although researchers are generally aware of the literature on the causes, consequences, and potential solutions for increasing participation, confusion remains regarding the use of population descriptors. Our findings highlight the need for improved education, greater consensus, and expanded dialogue within the genomic research community to promote the harmonization of population descriptors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Acceptability and Feasibility of an Educational Intervention to Improve Researcher-Participant Interactions in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Clinical Trial: Research Team Feedback on the BRIEF Intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Interactions with families are essential to successful recruitment conversations that promote informed decision-making about clinical research enrollment. However, there is little evidence about how to implement communication-oriented recruitment training among pediatric clinical research teams. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of Better Research Interactions for Every Family (BRIEF), a multipart educational intervention to improve relationship-based conversations about clinical trial enrollment with families in the neonatal setting. STUDY DESIGN: We piloted BRIEF in partnership with a neonatal clinical research team. Research team members completed surveys following the BRIEF intervention's online module and the BRIEF group training session. They completed self-assessments after consent discussions before and after the BRIEF intervention, in which they rated their achievement of recruitment skills taught in BRIEF. Research team members also completed a final study interview to provide feedback on the intervention components, training content, and use of skills in practice. RESULTS: All nine research team members completed all components of BRIEF. Survey responses showed moderate to low satisfaction with previous recruitment training before BRIEF and high satisfaction with the BRIEF training. Self-assessments showed significant increases in reported partnership with bedside nursing (p = 0.02) and confirmation of family names (p = 0.05) after BRIEF training. Interviews provided further evidence of overall satisfaction with the BRIEF training, its content, and the skills learned, as well as opportunities for improvement, particularly in supporting challenging conversations. CONCLUSION: This pilot study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the BRIEF intervention, as well as opportunities for improvement in future training. KEY POINTS: · It was feasible to implement the BRIEF researcher training in a single-site NICU trial.. · BRIEF training was acceptable to research team members.. · BRIEF training shows potential to improve relationship-based research communication..

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Building a Digital Health Research Platform to Enable Recruitment, Enrollment, Data Collection, and Follow-Up for a Highly Diverse Longitudinal US Cohort of 1 Million People in the All of Us Research Program: Design and Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal cohort studies have traditionally relied on clinic-based recruitment models, which limit cohort diversity and the generalizability of research outcomes. Digital research platforms can be used to increase participant access, improve study engagement, streamline data collection, and increase data quality; however, the efficacy and sustainability of digitally enabled studies rely heavily on the design, implementation, and management of the digital platform being used. OBJECTIVE: We sought to design and build a secure, privacy-preserving, validated, participant-centric digital health research platform (DHRP) to recruit and enroll participants, collect multimodal data, and engage participants from diverse backgrounds in the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) All of Us Research Program (AOU). AOU is an ongoing national, multiyear study aimed to build a research cohort of 1 million participants that reflects the diversity of the United States, including minority, health-disparate, and other populations underrepresented in biomedical research (UBR). METHODS: We collaborated with community members, health care provider organizations (HPOs), and NIH leadership to design, build, and validate a secure, feature-rich digital platform to facilitate multisite, hybrid, and remote study participation and multimodal data collection in AOU. Participants were recruited by in-person, print, and online digital campaigns. Participants securely accessed the DHRP via web and mobile apps, either independently or with research staff support. The participant-facing tool facilitated electronic informed consent (eConsent), multisource data collection (eg, surveys, genomic results, wearables, and electronic health records [EHRs]), and ongoing participant engagement. We also built tools for research staff to conduct remote participant support, study workflow management, participant tracking, data analytics, data harmonization, and data management. RESULTS: We built a secure, participant-centric DHRP with engaging functionality used to recruit, engage, and collect data from 705,719 diverse participants throughout the United States. As of April 2024, 87% (n=613,976) of the participants enrolled via the platform were from UBR groups, including racial and ethnic minorities (n=282,429, 46%), rural dwelling individuals (n=49,118, 8%), those over the age of 65 years (n=190,333, 31%), and individuals with low socioeconomic status (n=122,795, 20%). CONCLUSIONS: We built a participant-centric digital platform with tools to enable engagement with individuals from different racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds and other UBR groups. This DHRP demonstrated successful use among diverse participants. These findings could be used as best practices for the effective use of digital platforms to build and sustain cohorts of various study designs and increase engagement with diverse populations in health research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Research updates in cystic fibrosis related diabetes: Understanding pathophysiology, expanding animal and human islet models, and advancing clinical and translational research.

In 2024-2025, the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation (US) and Cystic Fibrosis Trust (UK) hosted an International CFRD Consortium round-table webinar series for basic science, translational, and clinical researchers with the goal of sharpening mechanistic understanding of CFRD pathogenesis and prioritizing therapeutic development. This review summarizes the research priorities identified in the International CFRD Consortium, including (i) further investigation into the role of pancreatic fibrosis, vascular abnormalities, and α-cell dysfunction in the development of CFRD; (ii) the creation and refinement of novel animal and human cell- and tissue-based models to understand the complex interplay of exocrine and endocrine cells in the CF pancreas; (iii) development and validation of circulating and imaging biomarkers, together with dynamic glucose testing to explore β-cell function and kinetics in people with CF across the dysglycemia spectrum; and (iv) prospective clinical studies to guide CFRD treatment options and investigate the changing landscape of aging, increasing prevalence of obesity and diabetes and their complications in the era of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) modulators. Collectively, these priorities aim to accelerate transition from mechanism to intervention and expand evidence-based care for people with CF at risk of, or living with, CFRD.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Implementing a training resource for large-scale genomic data analysis in the All of Us Researcher Workbench.

A lack of representation in genomic research and limited access to computational training create barriers for many researchers seeking to analyze large-scale genetic datasets. The All of Us Research Program provides an unprecedented opportunity to address these gaps by offering genomic data from a broad range of participants, but its impact depends on equipping researchers with the necessary skills to use it effectively. The All of Us Biomedical Researcher (BR) Scholars Program at Baylor College of Medicine aims to break down these barriers by providing early-career researchers with hands-on training in computational genomics through the All of Us Evenings with Genetics Research Program. The year-long program begins with the faculty summit, an in-person computational boot camp that introduces scholars to foundational skills for using the All of Us dataset via a cloud-based research environment. The genomics tutorials focus on genome-wide association studies (GWASs), utilizing Jupyter Notebooks and the Hail computing framework to provide an accessible and scalable approach to large-scale data analysis. Scholars engage in hands-on exercises covering data preparation, quality control, association testing, and result interpretation. By the end of the summit, participants will have successfully conducted a GWAS, visualized key findings, and gained confidence in computational resource management. This initiative expands access to genomic research by equipping early-career researchers from a variety of backgrounds with the tools and knowledge to analyze All of Us data. By lowering barriers to entry and promoting the study of representative populations, the program fosters innovation in precision medicine and advances equity in genomic research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement in Pediatric Health Research: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) can increase the relevance and efficiency of research projects. An overview of PPIE approaches and implementation in pediatric research studies is needed to facilitate learning from others' experiences. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to systematically review practices in PPIE across all pediatric health research disciplines regarding characteristics and recruitment of PPIE participants, timepoints and methods used for PPIE, levels of involvement, benefits and barriers of PPIE. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane and PsycInfo using a comprehensive set of terms based on the concepts 'Patient and Public Involvement,' 'Health Research' and 'Pediatrics.' INCLUSION CRITERIA: We included original research articles describing PPIE implementation in pediatric health research published in English or German between 01/2003-10/2024. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data was extracted using predefined categories and synthesized by narrative summary and thematic synthesis. PPIE reporting quality was assessed using the GRIPP2 short form checklist. MAIN RESULTS: Out of 1910 references, we included 37 original research articles, representing 35 studies. PPIE participants were mostly children, adolescents or caregivers involved in all research stages, especially in study design (89%) and recruitment (51%). Key positive impacts of PPIE on research included enhanced recruitment and retention rates and personal benefits for PPIE participants. Barriers to PPIE were financial and time resources required and challenges in recruiting representative PPIE participants. The level of involvement and PPIE reporting quality varied highly between studies. DISCUSSION: Common benefits and barriers of PPIE exist across pediatric research disciplines. Reporting quality varied highly between studies. CONCLUSIONS: PPIE is valuable in pediatric health research. Adherence to guidelines for conducting and reporting PPIE is important to enhance mutual learning. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: PPIE input contributed to the understandability of the lay summary. The findings of this review, together with parent and public input, will inform guidelines for future PPIE activities at the authors' institutions.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Proteomics at scale: Bottlenecks and opportunities for early-career researchers in a fast developing field.

The field of proteomics has rapidly evolved over the last five years enabled by rapid advances in instrumentation and computation. At the same time, the proteomics community is also growing. This is reflected by the increasing participation in international conferences such as those organized by the European Proteomics Association and the Human Proteome Organization. These events provide early-career researchers with unique opportunities to exchange ideas, develop collaborations, and build networks that support professional development. One such network is the Young Proteomics Investigators Club, a European initiative supported by European Proteomics Association and led by early-career researchers. In this Community-Driven project, we investigate recent trends in proteomics by screening conference abstracts and evaluating the session attendance at Human Proteome Organization Congresses and European Proteomics Association conferences. Based on these analyses, we identified five areas that, from our perspective, are shaping the current trends in proteomics: clinical proteomics, proteomics of post-translational modifications, single-cell proteomics, systems biology and multi-omics, and computational proteomics. For each area, we highlight both unique challenges and identify a common theme: a shift from exploratory studies with manageable sample numbers towards large screenings and cohorts and the generation of big data, which often comes with the lack of computational support, organizational networks, and infrastructure. In this light, we describe the unique challenges and opportunities faced by early-career researchers. We point to actionable directions for enabling reproducible and transparent proteomics as well as community-driven projects and initiatives, which are often providing training and support. SIGNIFICANCE: In this perspective, the Young Proteomics Investigators Club (YPIC) discusses advances in analytical developments and computational approaches in proteomics research. Based on empirical analysis of recent European Proteomics Association conference and Human Proteome Organization congresses contributions, we identify clinical, single-cell, post-translational and systems-level proteomics as the research areas that have gained most momentum in the last three to five years. What makes this work distinctive is that it is written by and for early-career researchers, thereby uniquely identifying where momentum, challenges, and unmet needs converge for the newest generation of proteomics researchers. Rather than cataloguing advances, we examine the widening gap between what modern proteomics can generate and what individual researchers can realistically process, validate, and interpret. We describe specific structural barriers including access to high performance computing, limited formal training in scalable data analysis, the need for unified benchmarking standards and navigating clinical collaboration frameworks. We then highlight opportunities for the field, such as community-curated benchmarks, interdisciplinary mentorship models, and shared computational infrastructure. By making these challenges explicit from an early-career researchers standpoint, we aim to inform how training, funding, and community initiatives can be shaped to support the next generation of proteomics researchers.

Proteomics↗

PubMed2025

Guidelines for the Creation of Accessible Consent Materials and Procedures: Lessons from Research with Autistic People and People with Intellectual Disability.

Informed, voluntary, ongoing consent is a central tenet of ethical research. However, consent processes are prone to exclusionary practices and inaccessibility. Consent materials are often too long and complex to foster understanding and ensure that people make truly informed decisions to participate in research. While this complexity is problematic for all people, these challenges are compounded for autistic people and people with intellectual disability. Consent materials and procedures rarely incorporate accommodations for processing and communication differences common in autism and intellectual disability. Failure to provide such accommodations ultimately threatens the conduct of ethical research. We describe lessons learned across multiple major U.S. research institutions that improved informed consent materials and procedures, with the goal of fostering responsible inclusion in research for autistic people and people with intellectual disability. We used these alternative materials and procedures in multiple research projects with samples of autistic people and people with intellectual disability. Each contributing team partnered with university human research participant protections personnel, accessibility experts, community members, and researchers to develop rigorous procedures for improving the readability and accessibility of informed consent materials. We present guidelines for designing consent materials and procedures and assert that participatory methods are vital to the success of ongoing accessibility initiatives. Adoption of understandable consent materials and accessible consent procedures can cultivate more equitable, respectful, and inclusive human research practices. Future work should expand on this work to design inclusive practices for populations with additional considerations.

autism↗

PubMed2026

The Gabriella Miller Kids First Data Resource for genomic research in pediatric cancer and congenital anomalies.

Nine-year-old brain tumor patient Gabriella Miller challenged members of Congress to "stop talking and start doing" when providing federal funding for research into cures for pediatric cancer and congenital anomalies. Though she ultimately lost her life to that cancer, her advocacy efforts resulted in the 2014 Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act, launching the Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Research Program at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The overarching goal of the Gabriella Miller Kids First Pediatric Research Program is to help researchers uncover new insights into the biology of childhood cancer and congenital anomalies. Following the signing of the Gabriella Miller Kids First Research Act 2.0 in January 2025, the program has been extended at NIH through 2028 to advance the groundwork laid in the program's first ten years. The Gabriella Miller Kids First Data Resource Center has since honored her legacy by building a comprehensive data resource for genomic research into pediatric conditions. Data from more than 30,000 participants annotated with demographic and clinical information related to their diagnoses have been released for secondary research and analysis using the center's web-based platforms. This paper analyzes the outcomes of the initiative and highlights breakthroughs made by the larger research community resulting from the availability of this data resource. We explore the future expansion of the data resource to include new modalities and tools for supporting life-saving research for children like Gabriella Miller.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Sustainability in translational genomics research with undiagnosed patients: What is it, why do we need it, and how do we do it?

PURPOSE: Genomics research enrolling undiagnosed patients can provide answers for one-third of participants, and more can be diagnosed through future reanalysis. The long-term value for participants has raised questions of the sustainability of these studies, but the meaning, goals, and best practices for sustainability remain unclear. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with researchers leading studies enrolling undiagnosed patients in the United States and Canada and used thematic content analysis to summarize key themes. RESULTS: Researchers lacked consensus regarding what sustainability was actually intended to sustain, variably referencing study procedures, personnel, data access, and participant recontact. However, the primary driver of sustainability was widely shared as the perceived obligation to continue to search for answers for undiagnosed participants. Proposed sustainability strategies included diversifying funding sources, developing centralized data infrastructure, and building collaborations across disciplines and institutions. Researchers also emphasized the need to address ethical concerns, to integrate research with clinical care, and for leadership from research funders to guide these efforts. CONCLUSION: Although genomics researchers perceived continued obligations to undiagnosed participants, they also lacked a shared understanding of the goals of sustainability and called for coordinated efforts to develop centralized infrastructure that integrated research and clinical care.

Humans↗

PubMed2022

Genetics for all: Tri-directional research engagement as an equitable framework for international partnerships.

Over the past 5 years, human genetics and genomics research has placed a greater emphasis on increasing diversity among research participants and study researchers as a means of expanding the reach of human genetics and the knowledge accrued by it. Within this context, international collaborations between investigators in well-resourced research-funded countries (RFCs) and those in research-underfunded countries (RUCs) have flourished, with the goal of recruiting more geographically diverse participant pools. Past harms to communities engaged in genetics research have underscored the importance of bi-directional relational engagements, in which researchers and communities work together to ensure ethical research practices and participant involvement. Successful collaborations in the global genomics space, however, are often dependent upon RUC stakeholder investigators and physicians, whose needs are frequently either excluded from existing models of bi-directional community engagement or conflated with that of the study community. Here, we advocate for building more equitable international partnerships through the empowerment of RUC stakeholder investigators-a tri-directional engagement model-that includes supporting, building, and validating the efforts of RUC investigators through training, access, and authorship. We highlight existing initiatives that serve as exemplars in this effort and offer a framework for the broader genetics community to support equitable models of international research partnerships while being mindful of practical challenges. The core concepts embodied augment ongoing efforts to diversify the field of human genetics and complement the long-term goal of genetics for all.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2026

Solutions for engaging priority populations in HIV cure research: a hybrid Delphi consensus-building process.

BACKGROUND: To achieve consensus on barriers and strategies to improve the engagement of three priority populations - Black and Latino/a/x individuals, cisgender women, and transgender women in HIV cure research. METHODS: We assembled a panel of 54 experts assigned to six groups in a hybrid Delphi process: (1) HIV community members, (2) biomedical researchers, (3) medical providers, (4) funders and private industry members, (5) bioethicists and regulators, and (6) social scientists. Over 18 months, we conducted four iterative survey rounds and three group discussions to identify barriers and strategies to arrive at a consensus on how to engage these priority populations in HIV cure research. RESULTS: For Black and Latino/a/x populations, the panellists identified inadequate outreach and a lack of accessible educational information as primary barriers and emphasised community-driven engagement and partnerships with trusted leaders as key strategies. For cisgender women, logistical hurdles, caregiving responsibilities and time constraints were identified as major barriers, with flexible trial designs and equitable compensation proposed as solutions. For transgender women, the lack of transgender-focused research design, including misrepresentation and exclusion, was identified as a key barrier, while centring transgender-specific needs in study design achieved consensus as the most effective strategy. CONCLUSION: Among all four priority populations, investment in outreach, engagement along the research process, better integration of health needs with research, and enhanced incentives are not novel ideas, but remain obviously ignored in a way that has led to underrepresentation of people in HIV cure research, who carry the greatest burden of HIV in the U.S. SUMMARY: This paper uses a hybrid Delphi process to identify and reach consensus on key barriers and strategies to engage underrepresented groups: Black and Latino/a/x individuals, cisgender women, and transgender women in HIV cure research across the United States.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

The Genetic Data Market: Institutional Governance of Academic/Industry Research Partnerships for the Public Good.

The Trump Administration's cuts to research funding and opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion is destabilizing academic research. These attacks coincide with pointed government support for the private sector. But the conceptualization of academic versus private sector health research has historically been a false binary. Drawing on mixed methods research, this paper examines the genomic data market as an example of advantages and challenges of commercializing academic expertise. It also highlights the structural downsides of researchers individually navigating industry partnerships. While academia is currently being put in the unenviable position of being more likely to need the private sector to conduct research, with less federal funding to offer in exchange, structural pain points have existed for decades. This is an opportunity for academia to harness its powers of expertise and collective action to develop institutional policy to ensure academic/industry research is beneficial to the public health and diverse patient communities.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Optimizing participant and community engagement in cancer genomic sequencing research.

PURPOSE: We describe strategies implemented across research centers of the Participant Engagement and Cancer Genome Sequencing (PE-CGS) Network to optimize engagement of participants and communities in cancer genomics research. We also present consensus definitions of engagement and engagement optimization, informed by our shared experiences in the Network. METHODS: Key informant interviews and a document review identified engagement and optimization strategies across PE-CGS research centers. Findings were synthesized using qualitative content analysis. Consensus on definitions of engagement and optimization were developed through iterative review by PE-CGS members. RESULTS: PE-CGS research centers adopted tailored strategies based on community needs and scientific gaps. Engagement strategies included community-based efforts (eg, advisory boards and newsletters) and participant-focused approaches (eg, enhanced informed consent and decision support tools). Optimization strategies leveraged scientific methods (eg, randomized controlled trials and surveys) to evaluate engagement. Engagement was described as the sustained and meaningful interactions between researchers, participants, and communities. Optimization was described as the application of scientific methods to refine and improve engagement and research processes and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Engagement and optimization strategies have informed research planning, conduct, and dissemination across PE-CGS. These approaches and definitions provide a foundation for developing evidence-based practices to strengthen participant and community involvement in cancer genomics research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A workshop considering genetic research and data collection with American Indian and Alaska Native people outside of Tribal jurisdiction.

INTRODUCTION: In the United States (US), Tribes are sovereign nations and have the right to oversee research conducted with Tribal citizens. However, it is unclear who should approve research protocols when data from American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) people are collected off Tribal lands. As genetic research continues to advance and transform the delivery of healthcare, equitable inclusion of AIAN people is necessary, but oversight of research needs clarity. METHODS: We held a 3-day workshop with US thought leaders on genetic and other health research with AIAN people in urban areas to explore views and values on this issue and to discuss potential policy and practice solutions. RESULTS: Thirty-six individuals attended. Solidarity surfaced as a foundational motivation for Tribal Nations to review research conducted with AIAN people, whether on Tribal lands or not. Understanding data from Indigenous perspectives was identified as a way to ensure appropriate AIAN community protections are in place. Three discrete areas to improve policy were suggested-Tribal, Academic Institution, and National-to protect AIAN people participating in research both on and off Tribal lands. DISCUSSION: Researchers, whether Indigenous or not, must recognize Tribal sovereignty and operate in solidarity with the applicable and most appropriate ethical principles and regulations.

Alaska Native↗

PubMed2025

Catalyzing computational biology research at an academic institute through an interest network.

Biology has been transformed by the rapid development of computing and the concurrent rise of data-rich approaches such as, omics or high-resolution imaging. However, there is a persistent computational skills gap in the biomedical research workforce. Inherent limitations of classroom teaching and institutional core support highlight the need for accessible ways for researchers to explore developments in computational biology. An analysis of the Scripps Research Genomics Core revealed increases in the total number and diversity of experiments: the share of experiments other than bulk RNA- or DNA-sequencing increased from 34% to 60% within 10 years, requiring more tailored computational analyses. These challenges were tackled by forming a volunteer-led affinity group of approximately 300 academic biomedical researchers interested in computational biology, referred to as the Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (CBB) affinity group. This adaptive group has provided continuing education and networking opportunities through seminars, workshops, and coding sessions while evolving along with the needs of its members. A survey of CBB's impact confirmed the group's events increased the members' exposure to computational biology educational and research events (79% respondents) and networking opportunities (61% respondents). Thus, volunteer-led affinity groups may be a viable complement to traditional institutional resources for enhancing the application of computing in biomedical research.

Computational Biology↗

PubMed2026

"Will it be enough to be respected?": understanding personal, institutional, and societal harms and benefits of genomics research.

BACKGROUND: Transgender Identity Genomics Research (TIGR)-research examining potential associations between genetic factors and transgender, nonbinary, and gender diverse (trans) identities-takes place in a complex landscape with significant potential to either benefit or harm trans communities. As public and political scrutiny of trans communities intensifies, the stakes and potential impacts of TIGR are heightened and ethical, legal and social implications must be considered. To better understand how those who would be most affected by TIGR view such research, we explored trans adults' perceptions of TIGR in the current environment and how they perceive TIGR may impact their futures. METHODS: Using a community-based participatory research approach, we partnered with a trans-led Executive Stakeholder Board to conduct in-depth interviews with 31 trans adults in the United States between June-December 2024 and conducted a Reflexive Thematic Analysis. RESULTS: Participants (mean age=34 years, range=19-73 years; 61% people of color; 39% nonbinary, 39% transgender women, 22% transgender men) identified possible benefits of TIGR such as personal affirmation, increased social acceptance, and improved access to gender-affirming healthcare. They also expressed concerns about potential harms, including further stigmatization, discrimination, and pathologization of trans identities. While most viewed research in trans communities (including TIGR) as a net positive, some participants felt it less useful compared to addressing more urgent, material challenges trans communities face. CONCLUSION: Our findings underscore that TIGR, like all scientific research, is shaped by the sociopolitical environment. It is imperative that TIGR researchers engage meaningfully and ethically with trans communities to minimize potential harms and center community needs.

Genetics↗