Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Genomic research raises unique ethical concerns among Alaska Native and American Indian (AN/AI) people and their communities. The Center for the Ethics of Indigenous Genomic Research (CEIGR) was created to foster research that takes these concerns into account while considering the sovereign status of AN/AI tribal nations. Relationships developed within CEIGR have allowed for effective, collaborative research among individuals who come from diverse cultures, political and historical backgrounds, and academic disciplines, and who work for organizations with varying resources, capacities, and expectations. The CEIGR framework may inform other groups seeking to conduct social science research related to genomic research with tribal people and their communities.

Keywords

ELSI Alaska Native American Indian genomic research academic–community partnership

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abelson

Blacksher

E. A.

K. K.

Boesveld

S. E.

Goold

S. D.

(2013). Public deliberation in health policy and bioethics: Mapping an emerging, interdisciplinary field. Journal of Public Deliberation, 9(1), 5.

Angal

Petersen

J. M.

Tobacco

Elliott

A. J.

Network

(2016). Ethics Review for a Multi-Site Project Involving Tribal Nations in the Northern Plains. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 11, 91-96. doi:10.1177/1556264616631657

Avey

J. P.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

Beans

J. A.

Trinidad

S. B.

Tyndale

R. F.

Robinson

R. F.

(2016). Perceptions of pharmacogenetic research to guide tobacco cessation by patients, providers and leaders in a tribal healthcare setting. Pharmacogenomics, 17, 405-415. doi:10.2217/pgs.15.177

Beans

J. A.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

Apok

C. R.

Caindec

Dillard

D. A.

Robinson

R. F.

(2018). Community dissemination in a tribal health setting: A pharmacogenetics case study. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 25(1), 80-94. doi:10.5820/aian.2501.2018.80

Bernhardt

(2014). Genetic counselors and the future of clinical genomics. Genome Medicine, 6(7), 49-49. doi:10.1186/gm565

Burkhalter

Gastil

Kelshaw

(2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12, 398-422.

Consortium

I. H.

(2003). The International HapMap Project. Nature, 426, 789-796. doi:10.1038/nature02168

Dillard

D. A.

Caindec

Dirks

L. G.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

(2018). Challenges in engaging and disseminating health research results among Alaska Native and American Indian people in Southcentral Alaska. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 25(1), 3-18. doi:10.5820/aian.2501.2018.3

Dirks

L. G.

Shaw

J. L.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

Beans

J. A.

Kelly

J. J.

Dillard

D. A.

(2019). Perspectives on communication and engagement with regard to collecting biospecimens and family health histories for cancer research in a rural Alaska Native community. Journal of Community Genetics, 4, 435-466. doi:10.1007/s12687-019-00408-9

10.

Fisher

P. A.

Ball

T. J.

(2003). Tribal participatory research: Mechanisms of a collaborative model. American Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 207-216.

11.

Fisher

P. A.

Ball

T. J.

(2005). Balancing empiricism and local cultural knowledge in the design of prevention research. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 82(Suppl. 3), iii44-iii55. doi:10.1093/jurban/jti063

12.

Foulks

E. F.

(1989). Misalliances in the Barrow Alcohol Study. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental Health Research, 2(3), 7-17.

13.

Garrison

N. A.

(2013). Genomic justice for Native Americans: Impact of the Havasupai case on genetic research. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 38, 201-223. doi:10.1177/0162243912470009

14.

Gastil

(2010). The group in society. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

15.

Gilbert

S. G.

(2006). Supplementing the traditional institutional review board with an environmental health and community review board. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114, 1626-1629.

16.

Goins

R. T.

Garroutte

E. M.

Fox

S. L.

Dee Geiger

Manson

S. M.

(2011). Theory and practice in participatory research: Lessons from the native elder care study. Gerontologist, 51, 285-294. doi:10.1093/geront/gnq130

17.

Green

E. D.

Watson

J. D.

Collins

F. S.

(2015). Human genome project: Twenty-five years of big biology. Nature, 526, 29-31. doi:10.1038/526029a

18.

Greenbaum

(2013). Grand challenge: ELSI in a changing global environment. Frontiers in Genetics, 4, 158-158. doi:10.3389/fgene.2013.00158

19.

Harding

Harper

Stone

O’Neill

Berger

Harris

Donatuto

(2012). Conducting research with tribal communities: Sovereignty, ethics, and data-sharing issues. Environmental Health Perspectives, 120, 6-10. doi:10.1289/ehp.1103904

20.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

Beans

J. A.

Robinson

R. F.

Shaw

J. L.

Sylvester

Dillard

D. A.

(2017). Self-determination in health research: An Alaska Native example of tribal ownership and research regulation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14, 1324. doi:10.3390/ijerph14111324

21.

Hiratsuka

V. Y.

Brown

J. K.

Hoeft

T. J.

Dillard

D. A.

(2012). Alaska Native people’s perceptions, understandings, and expectations for research involving biological specimens. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 71, 18642. doi:10.3402/ijch.v71i0.18642

22.

Hull

S. C.

Wilson

D. R.

(2017). Beyond Belmont: Ensuring respect for AI/AN communities through tribal IRBs, laws, and policies. The American Journal of Bioethics, 17(7), 60-62. doi:10.1080/15265161.2017.1328531

23.

James

Tsosie

Sahota

Parker

Dillard

Sylvester

. . . Burke

(2014). Exploring pathways to trust: A tribal perspective on data sharing. Genetics in Medicine, 16, 820-826. doi:10.1038/gim.2014.47

24.

Kaiser

(2019). Native American groups wary of big U.S. biobank. Science, 364, 812-813. doi:10.1126/science.364.6443.812

25.

Kelley

Belcourt-Dittloff

Belcourt

(2013). Research ethics and indigenous communities. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 2146-2152. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301522

26.

Konrad

A. M.

(2006). Leveraging workplace diversity in organizations. Organization Management Journal, 3, 164-189. doi:10.1057/omj.2006.18

27.

LaVeaux

Christopher

(2009). Contextualizing CBPR: Key principles of CBPR meet the Indigenous research context. Pimatisiwin, 7(1), 1.

28.

Manson

S. M.

Garroutte

Goins

R. T.

Henderson

P. N.

(2004). Access, relevance, and control in the research process: Lessons from Indian country. Journal of Aging and Health, 16(5 Suppl.), 58s-77s. doi:10.1177/0898264304268149

29.

McEwen

J. E.

Boyer

J. T.

Sun

K. Y.

Rothenberg

K. H.

Lockhart

N. C.

Guyer

M. S.

(2014). The Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute: Reflections on an ongoing experiment. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 15, 481-505. doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-090413-025327

30.

Mello

M. M.

Wolf

L. E.

(2010). The Havasupai Indian tribe case: Lessons for research involving stored biologic samples. The New England Journal of Medicine, 363, 204-207. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1005203

31.

Morton

D. J.

Proudfit

Calac

Portillo

Lofton-Fitzsimmons

Molina

. . . Majel-McCauley

(2013). Creating research capacity through a tribally based institutional review board. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 2160-2164. doi:10.2105/ajph.2013.301473

32.

O’Doherty

K. C.

Burgess

M. M.

(2009). Engaging the public on biobanks: Outcomes of the BC biobank deliberation. Public Health Genomics, 12, 203-215. doi:10.1159/000167801

33.

Pacheco

C. M.

Daley

S. M.

Brown

Filippi

Greiner

K. A.

Daley

C. M.

(2013). Moving forward: Breaking the cycle of mistrust between American Indians and researchers. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 2152-2159. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301480

34.

Parkinson

A. J.

Hennessy

Bulkow

Smith

H. S.

(2013). The Alaska area specimen bank: A tribal-federal partnership to maintain and manage a resource for health research. International Journal of Circumpolar Health, 72, 20607. doi:10.3402/ijch.v72i0.20607

35.

Popejoy

A. B.

Fullerton

S. M.

(2016). Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature, 538, 161-164. doi:10.1038/538161a

36.

Sankar

P. L.

Parker

L. S.

(2017). The precision medicine initiative’s all of Us research program: An agenda for research on its ethical, legal, and social issues. Genetics in Medicine, 19, 743-750. doi:10.1038/gim.2016.183

37.

Scherr

C. L.

Dean

Clayton

M. F.

Hesse

B. W.

Silk

Street

R. L.

Jr. Krieger

(2017). A research agenda for communication scholars in the precision medicine era. Journal of Health Communication, 22, 839-848. doi:10.1080/10810730.2017.1363324

38.

Shaw

J. L.

Robinson

Starks

Burke

Dillard

D. A.

(2013). Risk, reward, and the double-edged sword: Perspectives on pharmacogenetic research and clinical testing among Alaska Native people. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 2220-2225. doi:10.2105/ajph.2013.301596

39.

Stark

Dolman

Manolio

T. A.

Ozenberger

Hill

S. L.

Caulfied

M. J.

. . . North

K. N.

(2019). Integrating genomics into healthcare: A global responsibility. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 104, 13-20. doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2018.11.014

40.

United States Commission on Civil Rights. (2018). Broken promises: Continuing federal funding shortfall for Native Americans. Retrieved from https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/2018/12-20-Broken-Promises.pdf

41.

Warne

D. K.

Frizzell

L. B.

(2014). American Indian health policy: Historical trends and contemporary issues. American Journal of Public Health, 104(Suppl. 3), S263-S267. doi:10.2105/ajph.2013.301682

Fostering Ethical,Legal,and Social Implications Research in Tribal Communities: The Center for the Ethics of Indigenous Genomic Research

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References