Leading by example: How the Webster team's systematic review quietly rebuked the field's preoccupation with biomarker “disclosure,” and why it matters
Year: 2026
Type: review
Abstract: In this issue, Webster and colleagues report findings and provide direction following a systematic review and evidence synthesis designed to understand the decisional needs of research participants considering whether to receive biomarker or genetic risk information. The report serves as a foundation for a future of participant-centered approaches to the return of individual results in Alzheimer's disease research. This Ethics Response comments on the authors' terminology choices highlighting the notable absence of references to disclosure. The Response concludes that alternative terms like return or sharing of results offer less stigmatizing and more patient-centered approaches to communicating biomarker and genetic test results.
Source: Journal of Alzheimer s Disease
Author: Jennifer H. Lingler
Institution: University of California, Davis
Language: English
Topic: Ethics in Clinical Research
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: hybrid
Funder: National Institutes of Health
OpenAlex ID: W7128920552