About this Journal Submit a Manuscript Table of Contents
Neuroscience Journal
Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 439145, 7 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/439145
Review Article

Incidental Findings in Neuroimaging: Ethical and Medicolegal Considerations

1Centre of Neurosciences Study, Queen’s University, 18 Stuart Street, Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 3N6
2Centre of Studies in Primary Care, Queen’s University, 220 Bagot Street, Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 5E9
3Department of Family Medicine, Queen’s University, 220 Bagot Street, Kingston, ON, Canada K7L 5E9

Received 24 August 2012; Revised 15 October 2012; Accepted 25 October 2012

Academic Editor: Ellen M. Mowry

Copyright © 2013 Lawrence Leung. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. S. M. Wolf, “Introduction: the challenge of incidental cindings,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 216–218, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. Illes, M. P. Kirschen, K. Karetsky et al., “Discovery and disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging research,” Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 743–747, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. J. Illes, M. P. Kirschen, E. Edwards et al., “Practical approaches to incidental findings in brain imaging research,” Neurology, vol. 70, no. 5, pp. 384–390, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. G. L. Katzman, A. P. Dagher, and N. J. Patronas, “Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging from 1000 asymptomatic volunteers,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 282, no. 1, pp. 36–39, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. M. W. Vernooij, M. A. Ikram, H. L. Tanghe et al., “Incidental findings on brain MRI in the general population,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 357, no. 18, pp. 1821–1828, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. F. Weber and H. Knopf, “Incidental findings in magnetic resonance imaging of the brains of healthy young men,” Journal of the Neurological Sciences, vol. 240, no. 1-2, pp. 81–84, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. Z. Morris, W. N. Whiteley, W. T. Longstreth et al., “Incidental findings on brain magnetic resonance imaging: systematic review and meta-analysis,” British Medical Journal, vol. 339, article b3016, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. B. S. Kim, J. Illes, R. T. Kaplan, A. Reiss, and S. W. Atlas, “Incidental findings on pediatric MR images of the brain,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 1674–1677, 2002. View at Scopus
  9. S. N. Gupta and B. Belay, “Intracranial incidental findings on brain MR images in a pediatric neurology practice: a retrospective study,” Journal of the Neurological Sciences, vol. 264, no. 1-2, pp. 34–37, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. N. Palmour, W. Affleck, E. Bell et al., “Informed consent for MRI and fMRI research: analysis of a sample of Canadian consent documents,” BMC Medical Ethics, vol. 12, no. 1, article 1, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. K. C. Glass and T. Lemmens, “Research involving humans,” in Canadian Health Law and Policy, J. Downie, T. Caulfield, and C. Flood, Eds., pp. 459–500, Butterworths, Markham, Canada, 2002.
  12. I. A. Rits, “Declaration of Helsinki. Recommendations guidings doctors in clinical research,” World Medical Journal, vol. 11, p. 281, 1964. View at Scopus
  13. F. B. Simmons, “Regarding the Nuremberg Code,” Archives of Otolaryngology, vol. 80, pp. 118–119, 1964. View at Scopus
  14. Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS) : Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Ottawa, Canada, Public Works and Government Services, 2003.
  15. Detection and disclosure of incidental findings in neuroimaging research. in Workshop, N.a.S. University, Bethesda, Md, USA, January 2005.
  16. T. M. Scanlon, What We Owe to each Other, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998.
  17. A. McIntyre, “Guilty bystanders? On the legitimacy of duty to rescue statutes,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, vol. 23, pp. 157–191, 1994.
  18. P. Smith, “The duty to rescue and the slippery slope problem,” Social Theory and Practice, pp. 19–41, 1990.
  19. K. Williams, “Medical Samaritans: is there a duty to treat?” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 393–413, 2001. View at Scopus
  20. P. Litton and F. G. Miller, “What physician-investigators owe patients who participate in research,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 304, no. 13, pp. 1491–1492, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. S. M. Wolf, F. P. Lawrenz, C. A. Nelson et al., “Managing incidental findings in human subjects research: analysis and recommendations,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 219–248, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. S. A. Tovino, “Incidental findings: a common law approach,” Accountability in Research, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 242–261, 2008. View at Scopus
  23. Suthers v. Amgen, Inc. in 372 F. Supp. 2d 416, S.D. N.Y., 2005.
  24. A. C. Milstein, “Research malpractice and the issue of incidental findings,” Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 356–360, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. C. H. Coleman, “Duties to subjects in clinical research,” Vanderbilt Law Review, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 387–449, 2005. View at Scopus
  26. T. Heinemann, C. Hoppe, S. Listl, A. Spickhoff, and C. E. Elger, “Incidental findings in neuroimaging—ethical problems and solutions,” Deutsches Arzteblatt, vol. 104, no. 27, pp. A1982–A1987, 2007. View at Scopus
  27. L. Belsky and H. S. Richardson, “Medical researchers' ancillary clinical care responsibilities,” British Medical Journal, vol. 328, no. 7454, pp. 1494–1496, 2004. View at Scopus
  28. H. S. Richardson and L. Belsky, “The ancillary-care responsibilities of medical researchers an ethical framework for thinking about the clinical care that researchers owe their subjects,” Hastings Center Report, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 25–33, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus