Display options
Share it on

J Public Health Res. 2012 Feb 14;1(1):38-44. doi: 10.4081/jphr.2012.e8. eCollection 2012 Feb 17.

Analysis of existing international policy evidence in public health genomics: mapping exercise.

Journal of public health research

Elena V Syurina, Tobias Schulte In den Bäumen, Frans J M Feron, Angela Brand

Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Medicine, School for Public Healh and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maasricht University , the Netherlands ; ; Institute for Public Health Genomics, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Cluster of Genetics and Cell Biology, Faculty of Health, Madicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University , the Netherlands.
  2. Institute for Public Health Genomics, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Cluster of Genetics and Cell Biology, Faculty of Health, Madicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University , the Netherlands.
  3. Department of Social Medicine, School for Public Healh and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maasricht University , the Netherlands ;

PMID: 25170444 PMCID: PMC4140310 DOI: 10.4081/jphr.2012.e8

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the last decades we have seen a constant growth in the fields of science related to the use of genome-based health information. However, there is a gap between basic science research and the Public Health everyday practice. For a successful introduction of genome-based technologies policy actions on the international level are needed. This work represents the initial stage of the PHGEN II (Public Health Genomics European Network II) project. In order to prepare a base for bridging genomics and Public Health, an inventory study of the existing legislative base dealing with controversies of genome-based knowledge was conducted. The work results in the mapping of the most and the least legislatively covered areas and some preliminary conclusions about the existing gaps.

DESIGN AND METHODS: The collection of the evidence-based policies was done through the PHGEN II project. The mapping covered the meta-level (international, European general guidelines). The expert opinion of the partners of the project was required to reflect on and grade the collected evidence.

RESULTS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE WAS MADE BY THE AREA OF COVERAGE: using the list of important policy areas for successful introduction of genome-based technologies into Public Health and the Public Health Genomics Wheel (originally Public Health Wheel developed by Institute of Medicine).

CONCLUSIONS: Severe inequalities in coverage of important issues of Public Health Genomics were found. The most attention was paid to clinical utility and clinical validity of the screening and the protection of human subjects. Important areas such as trade agreements, Public Health Genomics literacy, insurance issues, behaviour modification in response to genomics results etc. were paid less attention to. For the successful adoption of new technologies on the Public Health level the focus should be not only on the translation to clinical practice, but the translation from bench to Public Health policy and back. Coherent and consistent coverage of all aspects of the translation of genome based information and technologies is of outmost importance.

Keywords: genomics; legislation; policy; public health; public health genomics; translational research

References

  1. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2004 Sep;3(9):739-48 - PubMed
  2. Am J Bioeth. 2008 Mar;8(3):58-60; discussion W1-3 - PubMed
  3. Pediatrics. 2008 Aug;122(2):259-66 - PubMed
  4. Eur J Public Health. 2012 Aug;22(4):598-601 - PubMed
  5. JAMA. 2008 Jan 9;299(2):211-3 - PubMed
  6. Am J Prev Med. 2007 Oct;33(4):310-7 - PubMed
  7. Nat Rev Genet. 2006 Dec;7(12):966-72 - PubMed
  8. Eur J Hum Genet. 2008 Jan;16(1):5-13 - PubMed
  9. Genet Med. 2006 Jul;8(7):451-8 - PubMed
  10. Community Genet. 2001 Jul;4(1):2-11 - PubMed
  11. Eur J Public Health. 2011 Feb;21(1):4-5 - PubMed
  12. Sleep. 2010 Oct;33(10):1273-6 - PubMed
  13. Eur J Public Health. 2011 Feb;21(1):2-3 - PubMed
  14. J Transl Med. 2003 Jul 24;1(1):1 - PubMed
  15. ILAR J. 2008;49(3):338-46 - PubMed
  16. Community Genet. 2006;9(1):67-71 - PubMed
  17. Health Promot Int. 2005 Sep;20(3):306-15 - PubMed
  18. Nat Med. 2004 Sep;10(9):879 - PubMed
  19. Psychol Psychother. 2008 Dec;81(Pt 4):331-50 - PubMed

Publication Types