Overview
Title
Proposed Collection; 60-Day Comment Request; The Genetic Testing Registry (Office of the Director)
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The NIH wants to keep collecting information about many different genetic tests to help doctors understand them better, and they are asking people to share what they think about this plan. They noticed some questions people might have, like how much it will cost or how much time it will take to do this, but they haven't answered those yet.
Summary AI
The National Institutes of Health, part of the Health and Human Services Department, has announced a proposed data collection project that requires public comments under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The project, titled the Genetic Testing Registry, aims to collect detailed information on the availability and scientific basis of over 26,000 genetic tests. This registry is intended to help clinicians by providing insights into the accuracy, validity, and usefulness of genetic tests. The NIH seeks approval for the project to continue for three years, and public comments are requested within 60 days of the notice publication.
Abstract
In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 to provide opportunity for public comment on proposed data collection projects, the National Institutes of Health Office (NIH) of the Director (OD) will publish periodic summaries of proposed projects to be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
In a recent notice from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), a new data collection project called the Genetic Testing Registry (GTR) has been proposed. The project falls under the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which mandates public notice and invites comments on new data collection efforts. Aimed at gathering detailed information on genetic tests available in clinical laboratories, the GTR would serve as a resource for clinicians and researchers by providing insights into the accuracy, validity, and usefulness of these tests for over 26,000 genetic conditions.
Summary of the Document
The Genetic Testing Registry is designed to offer a centralized online database where test details can be submitted by developers, manufacturers, and researchers. This setup is expected to aid clinicians by offering much-needed information on genetic tests, thus helping in better diagnosis and treatment planning. The initiative, managed by the National Institutes of Health and under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval, is slated for a three-year term, pending community feedback. Public comments are encouraged within 60 days to ensure a robust and comprehensive input process.
Significant Issues and Concerns
There are several noteworthy issues with this document:
Costs Unaddressed: The document articulates the time burden on respondents and estimates the total annualized burden hours as 2,837. However, it does not specify any operating or maintenance costs associated with the GTR itself, potentially leaving out significant budgetary implications.
Practical Utility: Although the document emphasizes the GTR's potential benefits to clinicians, it lacks specific examples or a clear outline of how the collected data directly enhances the NIH's functionality.
Accessibility Barriers: Potential respondents looking to inquire further or obtain additional information are only provided with a non-toll-free number, which may discourage engagement due to cost concerns.
Extension Period: The request to extend the expiration date of the genetic test data collection beyond January 31, 2025, is vague, without any indication of how long the NIH seeks this extension.
Burden Details: The document quantifies respondent burden in hours but fails to offer a breakdown of specific activities or tasks contributing to this burden, leaving respondents without a clear understanding of what is expected.
Impact on the Public
The establishment of the GTR has the potential to significantly impact public health. By enhancing the accessibility of genetic testing information, clinicians can make more informed decisions, potentially leading to better health outcomes. Additionally, by highlighting areas lacking research, the registry may stimulate new scientific inquiries crucial for advancing medical knowledge.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Health Professionals: Clinicians stand to benefit greatly from the GTR, as it provides a wealth of data that could improve diagnostic accuracy and patient care quality. It may also reduce the time spent researching available genetic tests, allowing them to focus more on patient interaction and treatment.
Test Developers and Researchers: The registry offers a platform to showcase and validate their genetic tests, potentially increasing market reach and encouraging research collaborations.
Public Respondents: For individuals engaging in responding to the request for comments or using the registry, unclear cost implications and practical barriers, like the absence of toll-free communication options, might present challenges, possibly limiting diverse public engagement.
In closing, while the NIH's Genetic Testing Registry promises numerous benefits, addressing the highlighted concerns could enhance both stakeholder participation and the overall effectiveness of the initiative. Public feedback is crucial as this project progresses, emphasizing the importance of clear and transparent communication from the NIH to ensure expansive participation and support.
Issues
• The document does not provide detailed information on the potential costs associated with the operation and maintenance of the Genetic Testing Registry (GTR) beyond the time costs to respondents.
• The language regarding the 'Practical Utility' of the information collected may be perceived as vague, as it does not specify how the collected data will directly improve the agency's functions.
• The contact information for further inquiries includes a non-toll-free number, which might be a barrier for some respondents considering engaging with the agency.
• The document mentions the expiration date of the collection as 1/31/2025 and requests an extension, but does not clarify how much longer the extension would be sought beyond 2025.
• The document refers to the burden on respondents as being quantified in 'annualized burden hours,' but lacks a detailed breakdown or explanation of what activities this burden entails.