Returning Individual-Level Urgent or Emergent Research Results to Participants: The Project Baseline Health Study Experience

Neha J. Pagidipati,Brooke Heidenfelder,Lydia Coulter Kwee,Fatima Rodriguez,Ranee Chatterjee,Kishan S. Parikh,Michel G. Khouri,Jennifer Stiller,Julie Eckstrand,P. Kelly Marcom,Priyatham S. Mettu,Glenn J. Jaffe,Sumana Shashidhar,Susan Swope,Susan Spielman,Elizabeth Fraulo,L. Kristin Newby,Pamela Douglas,Charlene Wong,Robert Green,Scarlet Shore,Jessica Mega,Adrian F. Hernandez,Paul Campbell,Kenneth W. Mahaffey,Svati H. Shah
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.19.24313995
2024-09-22
Abstract:Background: Returning results to research participants is increasingly recognized as an ethical mandate, yet little is known about best practices to optimally communicate urgent or emergent results. Methods: The Project Baseline Health Study (PBHS) was a prospective observational cohort study of 2,502 participants enrolled from 2017-2019 and followed through 2023. The cohort represented a broad spectrum of health and disease, enriched to include participants with an elevated risk for breast or ovarian cancer, lung cancer, and/or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (60% of participants). Urgent or emergent results were returned during or after the baseline visit from vital signs; clinical laboratory testing; and ocular, cardiovascular, and pulmonary imaging. Results: Among 2,002 participants in this analysis, 39.7% had at least one urgent or emergent finding returned, representing a total of 1,159 results returned over 3 years. The most commonly returned results were eye findings (n=246), pulmonary nodules (n=159), abnormal stress echocardiograms (n=123), abnormal rest electrocardiograms (bradycardia) (n=74), and lung parenchyma findings (n=55). Participants with urgent or emergent incidental findings were older (mean [SD] 58.0 [16.2] years vs. 48.0 [16.6] years) with a greater burden of cardiovascular, metabolic, or cancer comorbidities than those without urgent or emergent incidental findings. Conclusions: This report from the PBHS study is one of the first to describe a process to systematically return urgent or emergent results to research participants. This process led to the successful return of clinically important results to participants but also required significant time and effort from study clinicians and staff.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?