Volume 15 Issue 11, November 2013

Finding common ground

• James P. Evans

Recommendations for returning genomic incidental findings? We need to talk!

• Wylie Burke
• Armand H. Matheny Antommaria
• Ron Zimmern

Processes and preliminary outputs for identification of actionable genes as incidental findings in genomic sequence data in the Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium

• Jonathan S. Berg
• Laura M. Amendola
• Gail P. Jarvik

Genetic incidental findings: autonomy regained?

• Effy Vayena
• John Tasioulas

Let us ask better questions

• Ellen Wright Clayton
• Susan E. Kelly

Return of incidental findings in genomic medicine: measuring what patients value—development of an instrument to measure preferences for information from next-generation testing (IMPRINT)

• Caroline Savage Bennette
• Susan Brown Trinidad
• David L. Veenstra

Experiences and attitudes of genome investigators regarding return of individual genetic test results

• Rachel B. Ramoni
• Amy L. McGuire
• Steven Joffe

Researchers’ views on return of incidental genomic research results: qualitative and quantitative findings

• Robert Klitzman
• Paul S. Appelbaum
• Wendy K. Chung

Genetic medicine and incidental findings: it is more complicated than deciding whether to disclose or not

• Gillian Crawford
• Nicola Foulds
• Anneke Lucassen

ACMG statement on access to reproductive options after prenatal diagnosis

ACMG Standards and Guidelines for constitutional cytogenomic microarray analysis, including postnatal and prenatal applications: revision 2013

• Sarah T. South
• Charles Lee
• Hutton M. Kearney

Standard enrichment methods for targeted next-generation sequencing in high-repeat genomic regions

• Patricia W. Mueller
• Justine Lyons
• R. Benjamin Isett

Correction: Corrigendum: Frequency of Prader–Willi syndrome in births conceived via assisted reproductive technology