PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Task Force on Genetic Testing”

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
PubMed1999

Promoting safe and effective genetic tests in the United States: work of the task force on genetic testing.

The Task Force on Genetic Testing was created to review genetic testing in the United States and, when necessary, to make recommendations to ensure the development of safe and effective genetic tests. A survey to explore the state of genetic testing was undertaken for the Task Force and completed in early 1995. The survey, as well as literature reports and other information collected for the Task Force, showed problems affecting safety and effectiveness, as defined by the Task Force: validity and utility of predictive tests, laboratory quality, and appropriate use by healthcare providers and consumers. On the basis of these findings, the Task Force made several recommendations to ensure safe and effective genetic testing. The Secretary of Health and Human Services followed up one recommendation by creating the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. One of its functions will be to implement other recommendations of the Task Force.

Genetic Techniques↗
PubMed1999

Genetic testing: a conceptual exploration.

This paper attempts to explore a number of conceptual issues surrounding genetic testing. It looks at the meaning of the terms, genetic information and genetic testing in relation to the definition set out by the Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing in the UK, and by the Task Force on Genetic Testing in the USA. It argues that the special arrangements that may be required for the regulation of genetic tests should not be determined by reference to the nature or technology of the test, but by considering those morally relevant features that justify regulation. Failure to do so will lead to the regulation of genetic tests that need not be regulated, and would fail to cover other tests which should be regulated. The paper also argues that there is little in the nature of the properties of gene tests, using DNA or chromosomes, that in itself justifies a special approach.

Advisory Committees↗
PubMed1997

Genetic testing for susceptibility to adult-onset cancer. The process and content of informed consent.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance on informed consent to clinicians offering cancer susceptibility testing. PARTICIPANTS: The Task Force on Informed Consent is part of the Cancer Genetics Studies Consortium (CGSC), whose members were recipients of National Institutes of Health grants to assess the implications of cancer susceptibility testing. The 10 task force members represent a range of relevant backgrounds, including various medical specialties, social science, genetic counseling, and consumer advocacy. EVIDENCE: The CGSC held 3 public meetings from 1994 to 1996. At its first meeting, the task force jointly established a list of topics. The cochairs (G.G. and J.R.B) then developed an outline and assigned each topic to an appropriate writer and reviewer. Writers summarized the literature on their topics and drafted recommendations, which were then revised by the reviewers. The cochairs compiled and edited the entire manuscript. All members were involved in writing this report. CONSENSUS PROCESS: The first draft was distributed to task force members, after which a meeting was held to discuss its content and organization. Consensus was reached by voting. A subsequent draft was presented to the entire CGSC at its third meeting, and comments were incorporated. CONCLUSIONS: The task force recommends that informed consent for cancer susceptibility testing be an ongoing process of education and counseling in which (1) providers elicit participant, family, and community values and disclose their own, (2) decision making is shared, (3) the style of information disclosure is individualized, and (4) specific content areas are discussed.

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed1997

Proposal: a position for the insurance industry on genetic testing.

Proposed legislation to limit the use of genetic test results in insurance underwriting has appeared with increasing frequency at the state and federal level. The proponents seek to protect consumers from unfair discrimination by insurers. Can we not develop a proactive approach, acknowledging that we do not need to do prospective testing while we assert that we must retain the current status of equivalency of information between the underwriter and the applicant?

Genetic Testing↗