Citations

Clear

79 citation(s) found for "Sharp, Richard R".

Chapter 5 Ethical Considerations in the Use of Deep Brain Stimulation
Fiksdal, Alexander , Abulseoud, Osama A. , Sharp, Richard R.

Mayo Clinic

Deep Brain Stimulation | December 2, 2016 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 85-98

10.1201/9781315364759-6 Get It

Can Parents Refuse a Potentially Lifesaving Transplant for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency?
Nickels, Andrew S., Myers, Gary Douglas , Joshi, Avni Y. , Sharp, Richard R. , Lantos, John D. , Johnson, Liza‐Marie , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Pediatrics | June 15, 2016 | Volume: 138 | Issue: 1 | Pages: No page available

10.1542/peds.2016-0892 | PMID 27307145 Get It

If untreated, most children with severe combined immunodeficiency disorder (SCID) will die of complications of infection within the first 2 years of life. Early hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is the current standard of care for this disease. Although potentially lifesaving, prognosis of HSCT in SCID is variable depending on a number of host and donor factors. Of the survivors, many develop secondary problems such as chronic graft-versus-host disease or even second malignancies. Posttransplant care is complex and requires great effort from parents to adhere to difficult treatment regimens. In this article, we address the difficult ethical question of what to do if parents choose not to have their child with SCID undergo HSCT but prefer palliative care.
Building a Central Repository for Research Ethics Consultation Data: A Proposal for a Standard Data Collection Tool
Cho, Mildred K. , Anderson, Nick, Barnard, David , Boyle, Mary B., Capron, Alexander Morgan , Dorfman, Elizabeth, Havard, Kathryn, Reider, Carson, Sadler, John Z. , Sharp, Richard R. , Wilfond, Benjamin S. , McCormick, Jennifer B, Taylor, Holly A. , McCormick, Jennifer Blair , Anderson, Nick, Schwartz, Peter H. , Danis, Marion , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Clinical and Translational Science | March 10, 2015 | Volume: 8 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 376-387

10.1111/cts.12268 | PMID 25758372 Get It

AbstractClinical research ethics consultation services have been established across academic health centers over the past decade. This paper presents the results of collaboration within the CTSA consortium to develop a standard approach to the collection of research ethics consultation information to serve as a foundation for quality improvement, education, and research efforts. This approach includes categorizing and documenting descriptive information about the requestor, research project, the ethical question, the consult process, and describing the basic structure for a consult note. This paper also explores challenges in determining how to share some of this information between collaborating institutions related to concerns about confidentially, data quality, and informatics. While there is much still to be learned to improve the process of clinical research ethics consultation, these tools can advance these efforts, which, in turn, can facilitate the ethical conduct of research.
Communicating with Biobank Participants: Preferences for Receiving and Providing Updates to Researchers
Mester, Jessica L. , Mercer, MaryBeth, Goldenberg, Aaron J. , Moore, Rebekah , Sharp, Richard R. , Mercer, MaryBeth, Eng, Charis , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention | January 19, 2015 | Volume: 24 | Issue: 4 | Pages: 708-712

10.1158/1055-9965.epi-13-1375 | PMID 25597748 Get It

Abstract Background: Research biobanks collect biologic samples and health information. Previous work shows that biobank participants desire general study updates, but preferences about the method or frequency of these communications have not been explored. Thus, we surveyed participants in a long-standing research biobank. Methods: Eligible participants were drawn from a study of patients with personal/family history suggestive of Cowden syndrome, a poorly recognized inherited cancer syndrome. Participants gave blood samples and access to medical records and received individual results but had no other study interactions. The biobank had 3,618 participants at sampling. Survey eligibility included age ≥18 years, enrollment within the biobank's first 5 years, normal PTEN analysis, and contiguous U.S. address. Multivariate logistic regression analyses identified predictors of participant interest in Internet-based versus offline methods and methods allowing participant–researcher interaction versus one-way communication. Independent variables were narrowed by independent Pearson correlations by cutoff P < 0.2, with P < 0.02 considered significant. Results: Surveys were returned from 840 of 1,267 (66%) eligible subjects. Most (97%) wanted study updates, with 92% wanting updates at least once a year. Participants preferred paper (66%) or emailed (62%) newsletter methods, with 95% selecting one of these. Older, less-educated, and lower-income respondents strongly preferred offline approaches (P < 0.001). Most (93%) had no concerns about receiving updates and 97% were willing to provide health updates to researchers. Conclusion: Most participants were comfortable receiving and providing updated information. Demographic factors predicted communication preferences. Impact: Researchers should make plans for ongoing communication early in study development and funders should support the necessary infrastructure for these efforts. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 24(4); 708–12. ©2015 AACR.
Why brain death is considered death and why there should be no confusion
Burkle, Christopher M. , Sharp, Richard R. , Wijdicks, Eelco F., Wijdicks, Eelco F. M. , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Neurology | September 13, 2014 | Volume: 83 | Issue: 16 | Pages: 1464-1469

10.1212/wnl.0000000000000883 | PMID 25217058 Get It

Managing expectational language: translational genetic professionals consider the clinical potential of next-generation sequencing technologies
Koay, Pei P. , Sharp, Richard R. , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

New Genetics and Society | May 19, 2014 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 126-148

10.1080/14636778.2014.910448 | PMID 24883042 Get It

Next-generation Disadvantages: Identifying Potential Barriers to Integrating Genomics into Underserved Medical Settings
Goldenberg, Aaron J. , Marshall, Patricia A., Sharp, Richard R. , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Personalized Medicine | September 11, 2013 | Volume: 10 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 623-625

10.2217/pme.13.75 | PMID 29768757 Get It

‘Someone should oversee it’: patient perspectives on the ethical issues arising with the regulation of probiotics
Harrison, Krista L. , Farrell, Ruth M. , Brinich, Margaret A., Highland, Janelle, Mercer, MaryBeth, Tilburt, Jon C. , Geller, Gail , Marshall, Patricia A., Sharp, Richard R. , McCormick, Jennifer Blair , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Health Expectations | December 28, 2012 | Volume: 18 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 250-261

10.1111/hex.12027 | PMID 23279082 Get It

Abstract Background Although many probiotic products are currently available in yogurt or pill form in the United States ( US ), there is uncertainty surrounding the structure of regulation of these products. As more therapeutic probiotics are developed, changes to existing regulatory process in the United States may be required to meet the needs of patients and users in the population. Objective This study examined how patients with chronic gastrointestinal ( GI ) diseases view the regulation of probiotics. Design We conducted a multi‐site qualitative study consisting of focus groups of patients with chronic gastrointestinal diseases at three tertiary hospitals: at [institutions removed for blinded review]. Results We conducted 22 focus groups with 136 patients with major gastrointestinal ( GI ) diseases between March and August 2009. Participants were not familiar with the existing regulation of probiotic products but wanted assurances of accurate labelling of strain as well as safety. Participants raised concerns that regulation of probiotics might be accompanied by greater costs, reduced access and increased involvement of pharmaceutical companies. Although participants voiced significant doubt of government regulators, they felt that products containing genetically modified probiotic strains should have oversight comparable to that of pharmaceutical drugs. Discussion and conclusion If GI patient perspectives are indicative of public perceptions of therapeutic probiotics in the United States, consumers may expect more rigorous regulation in the future while simultaneously wanting low costs, easy access and low involvement of pharmaceutical companies. Manufacturers, translational scientists, clinicians and regulators should be sensitive to consumer attitudes when designing, testing and regulating new therapeutic probiotics.
The Establishment of Research Ethics Consultation Services (RECS): An Emerging Research Resource
Sharp, Richard R. , Ottenberg, Abigale L., Reider, Carson, Wilfond, Benjamin S. , McCormick, Jennifer Blair , Taylor, Holly A. , Sharp, Richard R

Mayo Clinic

Clinical and Translational Science | December 6, 2012 | Volume: 6 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 40-44

10.1111/cts.12008 | PMID 23399088 Get It

AbstractEmphasis on translational research to facilitate progression from the laboratory into the community also creates a dynamic in which ethics and social policy questions and solutions are ever pressing. In response, academic institutions are creating Research Ethics Consultation Services (RECS). All Clinical Translational Science Award institutions were surveyed in early 2010 to determine which institutions have a RECS in operation and what is their composition and function. Of the 46 institutions surveyed, 33 (70%) have a RECS. Only 15 RECS have received any consult requests in the last year. Issues that are common among these relatively nascent services include relationships with institutional oversight committees, balancing requestor concerns about confidentiality with research integrity and human subjects protection priorities, tracking consult data and outcomes, and developing systems for internal evaluation. There is variability in how these issues are approached. It will be important to be attentive to the institutional context to develop an appropriate approach. Further data about the issues raised by requestors and the recommendations provided are necessary to build a community of scholars who can navigate and resolve ethical issues encountered along the translational research pathway. Clin Trans Sci 2013; Volume 6: 40–44