A systematic literature review of individuals’ perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the United States

Concerns about genetic privacy affect individuals’ willingness to accept genetic testing in clinical care and to participate in genomics research. To learn what is already known about these views, we conducted a systematic review, which ultimately analyzed 53 studies involving the perspectives of 47,974 participants on real or hypothetical privacy issues related to human genetic data. Bibliographic databases included MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, and Sociological Abstracts. Three investigators independently screened studies against predetermined criteria and assessed risk of bias. The picture of genetic privacy that emerges from this systematic literature review is complex and riddled with gaps. When asked specifically “are you worried about genetic privacy,” the general public, patients, and professionals frequently said yes. In many cases, however, that question was posed poorly or only in the most general terms. While many participants expressed concern that genomic and medical information would be revealed to others, respondents frequently seemed to conflate privacy, confidentiality, control, and security. People varied widely in how much control they wanted over the use of data. They were more concerned about use by employers, insurers, and the government than they were about researchers and commercial entities. In addition, people are often willing to give up some privacy to obtain other goods. Importantly, little attention was paid to understanding the factors–sociocultural, relational, and media—that influence people’s opinions and decisions. Future investigations should explore in greater depth which concerns about genetic privacy are most salient to people and the social forces and contexts that influence those perceptions. It is also critical to identify the social practices that will make the collection and use of these data more trustworthy for participants as well as to identify the circumstances that lead people to set aside worries and decide to participate in research.

[1]  Amy L. McGuire,et al.  Genealogy databases and the future of criminal investigation , 2018, Science.

[2]  M. Rothstein GINA at Ten and the Future of Genetic Nondiscrimination Law. , 2018, The Hastings Center report.

[3]  Joshua C. Denny,et al.  Phenotype risk scores identify patients with unrecognized Mendelian disease patterns , 2018, Science.

[4]  Alessandro Blasimme,et al.  Open sharing of genomic data: Who does it and why? , 2017, PloS one.

[5]  B. Knoppers,et al.  Comparative Approaches to Genetic Discrimination: Chasing Shadows? , 2017, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[6]  D. Bowen,et al.  De-identified genomic data sharing: the research participant perspective , 2017, Journal of Community Genetics.

[7]  M. Gabay 21st Century Cures Act , 2017, Hospital pharmacy.

[8]  N. Moray,et al.  Paternity testing under the cloak of recreational genetics , 2017, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[9]  Jonathan S. Schildcrout,et al.  Public Attitudes toward Consent and Data Sharing in Biobank Research: A Large Multi-site Experimental Survey in the US. , 2017, American journal of human genetics.

[10]  M. Rothstein,et al.  Compelled Disclosures of Health Records: Updated Estimates , 2017, The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[11]  Xiaoqian Jiang,et al.  Addressing Beacon re-identification attacks: quantification and mitigation of privacy risks , 2017, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[12]  Murat Kantarcioglu,et al.  Expanding Access to Large-Scale Genomic Data While Promoting Privacy: A Game Theoretic Approach. , 2017, American journal of human genetics.

[13]  J. Menikoff,et al.  The Common Rule, Updated. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  Matthew J. Bietz,et al.  Privacy Attitudes among Early Adopters of Emerging Health Technologies , 2016, PloS one.

[15]  Robert Cook-Deegan,et al.  Beyond Our Borders? Public Resistance to Global Genomic Data Sharing , 2016, PLoS biology.

[16]  S. Fullerton,et al.  Genomics is failing on diversity , 2016, Nature.

[17]  Diane M. Korngiebel,et al.  Participants’ Role Expectations in Genetics Research and Re-consent: Revising the Theory and Methods of Mental Models Research Relating to Roles , 2016, Journal of health communication.

[18]  L. Pusztai,et al.  Patient preferences regarding incidental genomic findings discovered during tumor profiling , 2016, Cancer.

[19]  Andelka M. Phillips,et al.  ‘Only a click away — DTC genetics for ancestry, health, love…and more: A view of the business and regulatory landscape’ , 2016, Applied & translational genomics.

[20]  Denise L. Perry,et al.  Participants and Study Decliners’ Perspectives About the Risks of Participating in a Clinical Trial of Whole Genome Sequencing , 2016, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[21]  Ine Van Hoyweghen,et al.  Global trends on fears and concerns of genetic discrimination: a systematic literature review , 2016, Journal of Human Genetics.

[22]  B. Clarridge,et al.  Perspectives of decisional surrogates and patients regarding critical illness genetic research , 2016, AJOB Empirical Bioethics.

[23]  Melissa L McPheeters,et al.  A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on broad consent and data sharing in the United States , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[24]  C. Bustamante,et al.  Privacy Risks from Genomic Data-Sharing Beacons , 2015, American journal of human genetics.

[25]  E. Rauscher,et al.  Privacy and Family Communication about Genetic Cancer Risk: Investigating Factors Promoting Women’s Disclosure Decisions , 2015 .

[26]  R. Green,et al.  Returning a Research Participant's Genomic Results to Relatives: Analysis and Recommendations , 2015, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[27]  E. Clayton Why the Americans with Disabilities Act Matters for genetics. , 2015, JAMA.

[28]  Kadija Ferryman,et al.  Motivations, concerns and preferences of personal genome sequencing research participants: Baseline findings from the HealthSeq project , 2015, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[29]  J. Schisler,et al.  Using Community-Based Participatory Research Principles to Develop More Understandable Recruitment and Informed Consent Documents in Genomic Research , 2015, PloS one.

[30]  B. Malin,et al.  Correction: A Systematic Review of Re-Identification Attacks on Health Data , 2015, PloS one.

[31]  David J. Kaufman,et al.  Demographic differences in willingness to provide broad and narrow consent for biobank research. , 2015, Biopreservation and biobanking.

[32]  Erick R Scott,et al.  A Genome Sequencing Program for Novel Undiagnosed Diseases , 2015, Genetics in Medicine.

[33]  S. Fröhling,et al.  Stakeholders’ perspectives on biobank-based genomic research: systematic review of the literature , 2015, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[34]  Robert C Green,et al.  GINA, genetic discrimination, and genomic medicine. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[35]  Jennifer B. McCormick,et al.  Genomic Data in the Electronic Medical Record , 2014, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[36]  M. Guyer,et al.  The Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute: reflections on an ongoing experiment. , 2014, Annual review of genomics and human genetics.

[37]  K. Sim,et al.  Informed consent for human genetic and genomic studies: a systematic review , 2014, Clinical genetics.

[38]  E. Nwulia,et al.  Genetic testing for the susceptibility to alcohol dependence: interest and concerns in an African American population. , 2014, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[39]  C. Gwede,et al.  Contrasting the ethical perspectives of biospecimen research among individuals with familial risk for hereditary cancer and biomedical researchers: implications for researcher training. , 2014, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[40]  Jon W. McKeeby,et al.  Integrating pharmacogenetic information and clinical decision support into the electronic health record , 2014, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[41]  J. Schiffman,et al.  Attitudes of Parents of Children with Serious Health Conditions regarding Residual Bloodspot Use , 2014, Public Health Genomics.

[42]  S. Hilsenbeck,et al.  Pediatric Data Sharing in Genomic Research: Attitudes and Preferences of Parents , 2014, Pediatrics.

[43]  Kensaku Kawamoto,et al.  Characterizing genetic variants for clinical action , 2014, American journal of medical genetics. Part C, Seminars in medical genetics.

[44]  Leslie G Biesecker,et al.  Research participants’ attitudes towards the confidentiality of genomic sequence information , 2013, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[45]  Yaniv Erlich,et al.  Routes for breaching and protecting genetic privacy , 2013, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[46]  Iftikhar J. Kullo,et al.  Ethical, legal, and social implications of incorporating genomic information into electronic health records , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[47]  F. Collins,et al.  Biospecimen policy: Family matters , 2013, Nature.

[48]  S. B. King,et al.  Community perspectives on public health biobanking: an analysis of community meetings on the Michigan BioTrust for Health , 2013, Journal of Community Genetics.

[49]  Matthew M Davis,et al.  Parents’ interest in whole-genome sequencing of newborns , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[50]  Deevakar Rogith,et al.  Attitudes regarding privacy of genomic information in personalized cancer therapy. , 2013, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[51]  Jodyn Platt,et al.  Public preferences regarding informed consent models for participation in population-based genomic research , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[52]  Amy Gutmann,et al.  Found your DNA on the web: reconciling privacy and progress. , 2013, The Hastings Center report.

[53]  R. Green,et al.  Attitudes about regulation among direct-to-consumer genetic testing customers. , 2013, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[54]  William Pao,et al.  DNA-Mutation Inventory to Refine and Enhance Cancer Treatment (DIRECT): A Catalog of Clinically Relevant Cancer Mutations to Enable Genome-Directed Anticancer Therapy , 2013, Clinical Cancer Research.

[55]  E. Halperin,et al.  Identifying Personal Genomes by Surname Inference , 2013, Science.

[56]  Eric D Green,et al.  The Complexities of Genomic Identifiability , 2013, Science.

[57]  Ellen Wright Clayton,et al.  Parental Perspectives on a Pediatric Human Non-Subjects Biobank , 2012, AJOB primary research.

[58]  J. Shendure,et al.  Informed consent for whole genome sequencing: A qualitative analysis of participant expectations and perceptions of risks, benefits, and harms , 2012, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[59]  D. Duquette,et al.  Michigan BioTrust for Health: Public Support for Using Residual Dried Blood Spot Samples for Health Research , 2012, Public Health Genomics.

[60]  L. Ross,et al.  Biobank participation and returning research results: Perspectives from a deliberative engagement in South Side Chicago , 2012, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[61]  D. Hegney,et al.  Patients' experiences on donation of their residual biological samples and the impact of these experiences on the type of consent given for the future research use of the tissue: a systematic review. , 2012, International journal of evidence-based healthcare.

[62]  Heather Skirton,et al.  Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives , 2012, European Journal of Human Genetics.

[63]  J. Botkin,et al.  Public Attitudes Regarding the Use of Residual Newborn Screening Specimens for Research , 2012, Pediatrics.

[64]  W. Burke,et al.  Genetics researchers’ and IRB professionals’ attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis , 2012, Genetics in Medicine.

[65]  P. A. Kelly,et al.  Balancing the Risks and Benefits of Genomic Data Sharing: Genome Research Participants’ Perspectives , 2011, Public Health Genomics.

[66]  Daniel R. Morrison,et al.  Two large‐scale surveys on community attitudes toward an opt‐out biobank , 2011, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[67]  P. A. Kelly,et al.  To share or not to share: A randomized trial of consent for data sharing in genome research , 2011, Genetics in Medicine.

[68]  Robert M. Goor,et al.  Assessing and managing risk when sharing aggregate genetic variant data , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[69]  D. Hegney,et al.  Patients' experiences towards the donation of their residual biological samples and the impact of these experiences on the type of consent given for secondary use: A systematic review. , 2011, JBI library of systematic reviews.

[70]  J. Nurnberger,et al.  Ethnic disparities in the perception of ethical risks from psychiatric genetic studies , 2011, American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics.

[71]  A. Lemke,et al.  Attitudes toward Genetic Research Review: Results from a Survey of Human Genetics Researchers , 2011, Public Health Genomics.

[72]  B. Wilfond,et al.  Patient Perspectives on Group Benefits and Harms in Genetic Research , 2010, Public Health Genomics.

[73]  K. Weinfurt,et al.  Simplifying informed consent for biorepositories: Stakeholder perspectives , 2010, Genetics in Medicine.

[74]  L. Ciaccia,et al.  The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks , 2010, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[75]  S. Fullerton,et al.  Genomic research and wide data sharing: Views of prospective participants , 2010, Genetics in Medicine.

[76]  Michelle M Mello,et al.  The Havasupai Indian tribe case--lessons for research involving stored biologic samples. , 2010, The New England journal of medicine.

[77]  A. Lemke,et al.  Attitudes toward Genetic Research Review: Results from a National Survey of Professionals Involved in Human Subjects Protection , 2010, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[78]  Wendy A. Wolf,et al.  Public and Biobank Participant Attitudes toward Genetic Research Participation and Data Sharing , 2010, Public Health Genomics.

[79]  K. Goddard,et al.  Biobank Recruitment: Motivations for Nonparticipation. , 2009, Biopreservation and biobanking.

[80]  L. Dressler,et al.  How Will GINA Influence Participation in Pharmacogenomics Research and Clinical Testing? , 2009, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[81]  B. Wilfond,et al.  Pediatric biobanks: approaching informed consent for continuing research after children grow up. , 2009, The Journal of pediatrics.

[82]  Jessica Roberts Preempting Discrimination: Lessons from the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act , 2009 .

[83]  Joan Scott,et al.  Veterans' attitudes regarding a database for genomic research , 2009, Genetics in Medicine.

[84]  Wendy A. Wolf,et al.  Assessing the understanding of biobank participants , 2009, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[85]  A. McGuire Identifiability of DNA Data: The Need for Consistent Federal Policy , 2008, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[86]  Sara Chandros Hull,et al.  Patients' Views on Identifiability of Samples and Informed Consent for Genetic Research , 2008, The American journal of bioethics : AJOB.

[87]  S. Nelson,et al.  Resolving Individuals Contributing Trace Amounts of DNA to Highly Complex Mixtures Using High-Density SNP Genotyping Microarrays , 2008, PLoS genetics.

[88]  Amy L McGuire,et al.  Confidentiality, privacy, and security of genetic and genomic test information in electronic health records: points to consider , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[89]  C. Skinner,et al.  Factors Associated with African Americans’ Enrollment in a National Cancer Genetics Registry , 2008, Public Health Genomics.

[90]  J. Wyatt,et al.  US and Scottish Health Professionals attitudes toward DNA biobanking. , 2007, AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium.

[91]  V. Champion,et al.  Cancer Patients' Attitudes toward Future Research Uses of Stored Human Biological Materials , 2007, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[92]  Daniel J. Solove,et al.  ダニエル・J・ソロブ「プライバシーの分類」--Daniel J. Solove, A Taxonomy of Privacy 154 U. Pa. L. Rev. 477 (2006) , 2006 .

[93]  Karen M Kaphingst,et al.  Views of female breast cancer patients who donated biologic samples regarding storage and use of samples for genetic research , 2006, Clinical genetics.

[94]  C. Coopersmith,et al.  Genetic research and testing in critical care: Surrogates’ perspective* , 2006, Critical care medicine.

[95]  Zhen Lin,et al.  Genomic Research and Human Subject Privacy , 2004, Science.

[96]  H. Valdimarsdottir,et al.  Perceived disadvantages and concerns about abuses of genetic testing for cancer risk: differences across African American, Latina and Caucasian women. , 2003, Patient education and counseling.

[97]  Jennifer L. Bevan,et al.  Informed lay preferences for delivery of racially varied pharmacogenomics , 2003, Genetics in Medicine.

[98]  M. Rothstein,et al.  Public Attitudes about Pharmacogenomics , 2003 .

[99]  Celeste M. Condit,et al.  How the public understands genetics: non-deterministic and non-discriminatory interpretations of the “blueprint” metaphor , 1999 .

[100]  D. Wertz The Difficulties of Recruiting Minorities to Studies of Ethics and Values in Genetics , 1999, Public Health Genomics.

[101]  J. E. Nash,et al.  Privacy and confidentiality in the publication of pedigrees: a survey of investigators and biomedical journals. , 1998, JAMA.

[102]  Robert Kevin Grigsby,et al.  Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects , 1993, Research on social work practice.

[103]  Louis D. Brandeis,et al.  The Right to Privacy , 1890 .

[104]  “Common Rule,et al.  Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects. Final rule. , 2017, Federal register.

[105]  Christopher G Chute,et al.  Preemptive genotyping for personalized medicine: design of the right drug, right dose, right time-using genomic data to individualize treatment protocol. , 2014, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[106]  David McHugh,et al.  Genetics in Medicine : Official Journal of the American College of Medical Genetics , 2011 .

[107]  A. McGuire,et al.  DNA data sharing: research participants' perspectives , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[108]  Daniel J. Solove,et al.  A Taxonomy of Privacy , 2006 .

[109]  Jennifer L. Bevan,et al.  Warranted concerns, warranted outlooks: a focus group study of public understandings of genetic research. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[110]  J. Ingram,et al.  Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on , 2003 .

[111]  Gail Geller,et al.  Mapping the human genome: An assessment of media coverage and public reaction , 2002, Genetics in Medicine.

[112]  A Heinrichs,et al.  PubMed Central. , 2001, Trends in molecular medicine.