Jennifer Viberg Johansson
BSc, MA, PhD student
Jennifer Viberg Johansson is interested in different methods to investigate peoples stated preferences, especially how to balance peoples preferences against other ethical values. Her PhD project is looking at the ethical issues concerning disclosure of incidental (or secondary) findings to research participants in genetic research. Disclosure of health related information such as blood pressure, lung function, cholesterol and blood sugar is uncontroversial and common practice, but there is debate in the biobank community on whether or not to disclose genetic risk information, and especially incidental findings.
Jennifer Viberg Johansson’s first two studies have a theoretical perspective on the arguments for and against disclosure, and whether offering participants to express their preferences would solve the issue. She is currently conducting empirical studies using both qualitative and quantitative methods to capture participants’ preferences when it comes to genetic risk information, for example using Discrete Choice Experiments to calculate participant’s trade-offs between different features of genetic risk information and to see if there are any differences between groups.
Jennifer Viberg Johansson holds an MA in Rehabilitation Science from Mid Sweden University. She is a licensed Prosthetist and Orthotist. Before starting her PhD, she was teaching at Jönköping University. She is currently involved in the IMI-funded BTCure project on Rheumatoid Arthritis, Mind the Risk and BBMRI.se.
Phone: +46 18 471 62 46
Handling incidental findings
How should we handle incidental findings in biobank and -omics research? Jennifer Viberg Johansson is looking at the arguments for and against disclosure of incidental findings.
Managing genetic risk information
Research generates huge amounts of genetic information. How should we handle it? That is what we are trying to find out in a large international research project.
Rare disease research
RD-Connect is a 7th framework project that aims to build an integrated platform connecting registries, biobanks and clinical bioinformatics for rare disease research. We address the ethical, legal and social issues (ELSI).
ELSI-Service for BBMRI.se
We run the ELSI-Services for BBMRI.se (BioBanking and Molecular Resource Infrastructure of Sweden): a national effort for efficient and automated collection of biological material funded by the Swedish Research Council.
Helping Europeans get healthier
BBMRI-LPC is building a network to connect established large-scale biobanks to new European biobank initiatives for large prospective cohort studies (LPC). We are involved in ethical and legal issues of transnational access to samples and data.
Jennifer Viberg on the Ethicsblog
Letting people choose isn’t always the same as respecting them
Source: jenniferviberg 2015-05-05
- Bioethics, vol. 30, ss. 203-209 DOI
- Ethics, Law and Governance of Biobanking .
- European Journal of Human Genetics, vol. 22, ss. 437-441 DOI
Biobank and registry ethics & law
For many years, researchers at CRB have provided constructive advise on how to deal with ethical and legal aspects of research using human tissue material and personal data. We have collaborated with biomedical scientists and published our findings in peer reviewed journals. As a summary of this research we have compiled a list of publications with abstracts. We have grouped them thematically to help you find the ones you might be interested in reading. Our publications deal with ethical frameworks and policy, regulatory aspects of biobank and registry research, informed consent, ethical review, integrity concerns, trust, genetic testing, indicental findings, commercialization, public and patient perceptions, rare diseases, children & biobanks & genetics, and biobank studies.
Multidisciplinarity, genetic risk information and ethics
Genetic risk is complex and difficult to understand. People react differently to genetic risk information. Some want to know everything; others don’t want to know at all. Jennifer Viberg is working to find out what people who participate in biobank research actually want researchers to do with potential secondary findings about participant’s genetic risk for different conditions.