IsisCB Explore

Article ID: CBB774833590

Polygenic risk-stratified screening for cancer: Responsibilization in public health genomics (August 2019)

Kerr, Anne (Author)
Broer, Tineke (Author)
Ross, Emily (Author)
Cunningham-Burley, Sarah (Author)

Social Studies of Science
Volume: 49
Issue: 4
Pages: 605-626

DOI: 10.1177/0306312719858404

URI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719858404

Publication Date: August 2019
Edition Details: Special Issue: From Person to Population and Back: Exploring Accountability in Public Health
Language: English

Outside Links

PubMed

WorldCat

Google Scholar

JSTOR

Academia.edu

Cancer; tumors Physicians; doctors Public health Risk assessment Cross-national comparison Technoscience; science and technology studies Diagnosis Genomics Data collection; methods Medicine 21st century

In this article, we examine professional discourse around the development of polygenic risk-stratified screening (PRSS) for cancer. Analyzing a range of contemporary professional literatures from Europe, North America and Australia, we explore how the drive to screen for molecular markers of cancer risk makes professionals, screening recipients and publics responsible, in different ways, for acquiring, curating and analyzing molecular data. Investigating how these responsibilities are invoked in discussions of new data practices, technologies, organizational arrangements, engagement, education and protocols for participation, we argue that agendas for PRSS for cancer are both expanding and stratifying responsibilities. Data collection is to be achieved by intensified responsibilities for including, reassuring and recruiting populations, as well as by opening and enriching the datasets on which models and preventative screening arrangements are based. Enhanced responsibilities for screening recipients and publics are also invoked, not just in relation to personal health but for population health more generally, via research participation and consenting to data re-use in the public interest. Professionals, screening recipients and publics are also to become responsible for moderating expectations of screening according to genomic designations. Together these discourses go beyond individual risk management to extend and diversify the responsibilities of practitioners, screening recipients and publics as public health genomics develops.

...More

Associated with

Article Klaus Hoeyer; Susanne Bauer; Martyn Pickersgill (August 2019) Datafication and accountability in public health: Introduction to a special issue. Social Studies of Science (pp. 459-475). unapi

Citation URI

https://data.isiscb.org/isis/citation/CBB774833590/

Citations Indexes

Similar Citations

Article Shirley Sun; Ann Hui Ching; (2021)
Social Systems Matter: Precision Medicine, Public Health, and the Medical Model (/isis/citation/CBB879164513/)

Article Katrin Amelang; Susanne Bauer; (August 2019)
Following the algorithm: How epidemiological risk-scores do accountability (/isis/citation/CBB077353059/)

Article Lyle Fearnley; (September 2020)
Viral Sovereignty or Sequence Etiquette? Asian Science, Open Data, and Knowledge Control in Global Virus Surveillance (/isis/citation/CBB925083175/)

Article Koichi Kameda; Ann H Kelly; Javier Lezaun; Ilana Löwy; (October 2021)
Imperfect diagnosis: The truncated legacies of Zika testing (/isis/citation/CBB603527462/)

Article Enrique Wulff; (2023)
Clinical Diagnosis and Cancer Probe: A History of Unity and Mass Migration (/isis/citation/CBB743051605/)

Article Mauro Capocci; (2017)
Regimen Strikes Back. Diagnosis, Genes and the Patient (/isis/citation/CBB699749755/)

Article Moran Levy; (2022)
Adequate trials: How the search for a cure shaped leukemia diagnosis (/isis/citation/CBB342218958/)

Article Justin B. Biddle; (2020)
Epistemic risks in cancer screening: Implications for ethics and policy (/isis/citation/CBB635137460/)

Article Baker, Jonathan D.; (June 2011)
Tradition and toxicity: Evidential cultures in the kava safety debate (/isis/citation/CBB825126706/)

Article David Armstrong; (February 2019)
The social life of data points: Antecedents of digital technologies (/isis/citation/CBB757557196/)

Article Alexandra Hillman; Joanna Latimer; (April 2019)
Somaticization, the making and unmaking of minded persons and the fabrication of dementia (/isis/citation/CBB034246323/)

Article Julia Swallow; Alexandra Hillman; (April 2019)
Fear and anxiety: Affects, emotions and care practices in the memory clinic (/isis/citation/CBB055124638/)

Article Erik Børve Rasmussen; (December 2020)
Making and managing medical anomalies: Exploring the classification of ‘medically unexplained symptoms’ (/isis/citation/CBB131501262/)

Article Wen-Yuan Lin; (May 2017)
Shi (勢), STS, and Theory Or What Can We Learn from Chinese Medicine? (/isis/citation/CBB930305022/)

Article Chia-Ling Wu; Jung-Ok Ha; Azumi Tsuge; (March 2020)
Data Reporting as Care Infrastructure: Assembling ART Registries in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea (/isis/citation/CBB772486717/)

Article Olga Kuchinskaya; (2019)
Citizen Science and the Politics of Environmental Data (/isis/citation/CBB990120305/)

Article Wen-yuan Lin; John Law; (2022)
Thinking differently with Chinese medicine: ‘Explanations’ and case studies for a postcolonial STS (/isis/citation/CBB161338816/)

Article Das, Sukta; (2011)
Evolution of Three Premier Cancer Institutes of India---TMC, CNCI & CIWIA---An Assessment (/isis/citation/CBB001024498/)

Article Hughes, J. T.; (2007)
Sir Victor Horsley (1857--1916) and the Birth of English Neurosurgery (/isis/citation/CBB000831627/)

Article Marcia Villanueva; (2020)
Medical training as a transformative experience: An analysis of doctorhood to question the professional identity formation paradigm (/isis/citation/CBB532101283/)

Comments

{{ comment.created_by.username }} on {{ comment.created_on | date:'medium' }}