Community Engagement in Genetics and Genomics Research: a Qualitative Study of the Perspectives of Genetics and Genomics Researchers in Uganda

Overview

Journal BMC Med Ethics

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Medical Ethics

Date 2024 Jan 3

PMID 38166828

Authors

Harriet Nankya

Edward Wamala

Vincent Pius Alibu

John Barugahare

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Generally, there is unanimity about the value of community engagement in health-related research. There is also a growing tendency to view genetics and genomics research (GGR) as a special category of research, the conduct of which including community engagement (CE) as needing additional caution. One of the motivations of this study was to establish how differently if at all, we should think about CE in GGR.

Aim: To assess the perspectives of genetics and genomics researchers in Uganda on CE in GGR.

Method: A cross-sectional qualitative study was conducted at Makerere University and Uganda Virus Research Institute. Twenty-five individuals participated, the majority being male (sixteen). Participants included nineteen genetics and genomics researchers (researchers and research coordinators), two CE officers, three nurses and one nursing counsellor. Data were collected using in-depth interviews and analyzed in a thematic manner using NVivo version 12 Plus.

Study Findings: Thirteen of the respondents had conducted CE in their GGR in either a geographical and disease-specific community. Some respondents said CE principles are the same and there is no need for special consideration for CE in GGR. Others gave ethical issues in GGR that require special consideration for CE in such research and these were categorized into six themes: GGR is new to communities, Difficulty in communicating GGR by the researchers, Genes are shared in communities, Cultural sensitivities against GGR, Community attitude toward GGR, Some GGR studies take long to end, and Negotiation of research benefits. Special considerations for CE when conducting GGR were suggested and categorized into seven themes: creating awareness of GGR in communities, obtaining both community acceptance and individual consent, CE team composition, involve communities in solving GGR challenges, prolong CE in some GGR, develop guidelines for CE in GGR, and legal considerations on GGR.

Conclusion: GGR was characterized by special issues that require special CE considerations for such research.

Citing Articles

Building genomic capacity for precision health in Africa.

Olono A, Mitesser V, Happi A, Happi C Nat Med. 2024; 30(7):1856-1864.

PMID: 38961224 DOI: 10.1038/s41591-024-03081-9.

References

Chemonges Wanyama E, Dicko B, Pare Toe L, Coulibaly M, Barry N, Bayala Traore K . Co-developing a common glossary with stakeholders for engagement on new genetic approaches for malaria control in a local African setting. Malar J. 2021; 20(1):53. PMC: 7818942. DOI: 10.1186/s12936-020-03577-y. View

Bates B, Lynch J, Bevan J, Condit C . Warranted concerns, warranted outlooks: a focus group study of public understandings of genetic research. Soc Sci Med. 2004; 60(2):331-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.05.012. View

Tindana P, de Vries J, Campbell M, Littler K, Seeley J, Marshall P . Community engagement strategies for genomic studies in Africa: a review of the literature. BMC Med Ethics. 2015; 16:24. PMC: 4407431. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-015-0014-z. View

Rebbeck T, Bridges J, Mack J, Gray S, Trent J, George S . A Framework for Promoting Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Genetics and Genomics Research. JAMA Health Forum. 2022; 3(4). PMC: 9223088. DOI: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2022.0603. View

Lemke A, Esplin E, Goldenberg A, Gonzaga-Jauregui C, Hanchard N, Harris-Wai J . Addressing underrepresentation in genomics research through community engagement. Am J Hum Genet. 2022; 109(9):1563-1571. PMC: 9502069. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.08.005. View

Mwaka E, Ekusai Sebatta D, Ochieng J, Munabi I, Bagenda G, Ainembabazi D . Researchers' perspectives on return of individual genetics results to research participants: a qualitative study. Glob Bioeth. 2021; 32(1):15-33. PMC: 7952062. DOI: 10.1080/11287462.2021.1896453. View

Khoury M . Genetics and genomics in practice: the continuum from genetic disease to genetic information in health and disease. Genet Med. 2003; 5(4):261-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.GIM.0000076977.90682.A5. View

Patch C, Middleton A . Genetic counselling in the era of genomic medicine. Br Med Bull. 2018; 126(1):27-36. PMC: 5998955. DOI: 10.1093/bmb/ldy008. View

Jackson C, Turner D, June M, Miller M . Facing Our History-Building an Equitable Future. Am J Hum Genet. 2023; 110(3):377-395. PMC: 10027570. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2023.02.005. View

10.

Tindana P, Yakubu A, Staunton C, Matimba A, Littler K, Madden E . Engaging research ethics committees to develop an ethics and governance framework for best practices in genomic research and biobanking in Africa: the H3Africa model. BMC Med Ethics. 2019; 20(1):69. PMC: 6798385. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0398-2. View

11.

Holzer J, Ellis L, Merritt M . Why we need community engagement in medical research. J Investig Med. 2014; 62(6):851-5. PMC: 4108547. DOI: 10.1097/JIM.0000000000000097. View

12.

Ochieng J, Kwagala B, Barugahare J, Mwaka E, Ekusai-Sebatta D, Ali J . Perspectives and ethical considerations for return of genetics and genomics research results: a qualitative study of genomics researchers in Uganda. BMC Med Ethics. 2021; 22(1):154. PMC: 8603565. DOI: 10.1186/s12910-021-00724-1. View

13.

Folayan M, Oyedeji K, Fatusi O . Community members' engagement with and involvement in genomic research: lessons to learn from the field. Dev World Bioeth. 2013; 15(1):1-7. DOI: 10.1111/dewb.12020. View

14.

Rutakumwa R, de Vries J, Parker M, Tindana P, Mweemba O, Seeley J . What constitutes good ethical practice in genomic research in Africa? Perspectives of participants in a genomic research study in Uganda. Glob Bioeth. 2020; 31(1):169-183. PMC: 7734109. DOI: 10.1080/11287462.2019.1592867. View

15.

Caulfield T, McGuire A, Cho M, Buchanan J, Burgess M, Danilczyk U . Research ethics recommendations for whole-genome research: consensus statement. PLoS Biol. 2008; 6(3):e73. PMC: 2270329. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0060073. View

16.

Foster M, Sharp R, FREEMAN W, Chino M, Bernsten D, Carter T . The role of community review in evaluating the risks of human genetic variation research. Am J Hum Genet. 1999; 64(6):1719-27. PMC: 1377916. DOI: 10.1086/302415. View

17.

Ramsay M, de Vries J, Soodyall H, Norris S, Sankoh O . Ethical issues in genomic research on the African continent: experiences and challenges to ethics review committees. Hum Genomics. 2014; 8:15. PMC: 4420849. DOI: 10.1186/s40246-014-0015-x. View

18.

McCormick J . How Should a Research Ethicist Combat False Beliefs and Therapeutic Misconception Risk in Biomedical Research?. AMA J Ethics. 2018; 20(11):E1100-1106. DOI: 10.1001/amajethics.2018.1100. View

19.

Skirton H, Cordier C, Ingvoldstad C, Taris N, Benjamin C . The role of the genetic counsellor: a systematic review of research evidence. Eur J Hum Genet. 2014; 23(4):452-8. PMC: 4666564. DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.116. View

20.

Watanabe D, Saito Y, Tsuda M, Ohsawa R . Increased awareness and decreased acceptance of genome-editing technology: The impact of the Chinese twin babies. PLoS One. 2020; 15(9):e0238128. PMC: 7500613. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238128. View