Genomic Newborn Screening: Verdict From an Australian Citizens’ Jury

OBJECTIVE: To support a nationally representative group of Australians to make informed, reasoned recommendations on the use of genomics in newborn screening programmes. DESIGN: Hybrid Citizens' Jury method. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Thirty Australian adults recruited by random ballot invitation and stratified selection against population-based demographic targets of age, sex, ancestry, highest level of education, location of residence (state/territory, urban/non-urban), experience of disability and parent/non-parent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Jury recommendations with reasons. RESULTS: The jury made 11 recommendations. The jury agreed whole genome sequencing could be used in the programme, but only if conditions were met regarding national consistency, benefit, Australian Government oversight, consent, reporting to parents, data protection, supporting parents and the healthcare system, and parent and public education. All of these conditions were agreed by consensus, except reporting to parents and parent and public education, where there was a supermajority (24/30) in agreement and minority dissent. The jury were split on Recommendation 11: how much genomic data should be extracted and retained. Nine jurors supported whole genome sequencing only if data extraction and retention were limited to interpretable, actionable genetic information; 21 jurors supported a more expansive approach. CONCLUSIONS: To maintain public trust in Australian newborn screening, programmes should take a more conservative approach to data extraction and storage until concerns are addressed and safeguarding conditions implemented. Jurors' key concerns include identifiability of genomic data, risk of data misuse and potential to undermine trust and participation in newborn screening.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Medical Journal of Australia
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.70184
Primary Topic
Genomics and Rare Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Genomic Newborn Screening: Verdict From an Australian Citizens’ Jury

Stacy M. Carter, Lucy Carolan, Saniya Singh, Kathleen Prokopovich et al.
The Medical Journal of Australia
Genomics and Rare Diseases
article

Genomic Newborn Screening: Verdict From an Australian Citizens’ Jury

Stacy M. Carter, Lucy Carolan, Saniya Singh, Kathleen Prokopovich, Yves Saint James Aquino, Chris Degeling, Kristi Jones, Margaret Otlowski, Bruce Bennetts, Emma Kellie Frost, Sarah Norris, Belinda Fabrianesi, Zornitza Stark, Kaustuv Bhattacharya, Patti Shih, Ainsley J. Newson, Joanne Scarfe, Diana Popic, Kristen Nowak, Louise Healy
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To support a nationally representative group of Australians to make informed, reasoned recommendations on the use of genomics in newborn screening programmes. DESIGN: Hybrid Citizens' Jury method. SETTING, PARTICIPANTS: Thirty Australian adults recruited by random ballot invitation and stratified selection against population-based demographic targets of age, sex, ancestry, highest level of education, location of residence (state/territory, urban/non-urban), experience of disability and parent/non-parent. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Jury recommendations with reasons. RESULTS: The jury made 11 recommendations. The jury agreed whole genome sequencing could be used in the programme, but only if conditions were met regarding national consistency, benefit, Australian Government oversight, consent, reporting to parents, data protection, supporting parents and the healthcare system, and parent and public education. All of these conditions were agreed by consensus, except reporting to parents and parent and public education, where there was a supermajority (24/30) in agreement and minority dissent. The jury were split on Recommendation 11: how much genomic data should be extracted and retained. Nine jurors supported whole genome sequencing only if data extraction and retention were limited to interpretable, actionable genetic information; 21 jurors supported a more expansive approach. CONCLUSIONS: To maintain public trust in Australian newborn screening, programmes should take a more conservative approach to data extraction and storage until concerns are addressed and safeguarding conditions implemented. Jurors' key concerns include identifiability of genomic data, risk of data misuse and potential to undermine trust and participation in newborn screening.

The Medical Journal of AustraliaVol. 224(4)
The University of Sydney (AU), University of Tasmania (AU), The University of Melbourne (AU), The University of Western Australia (AU), University of Wollongong (AU), Government of Western Australia (AU), Racing Victoria (AU), UNSW Sydney (AU), Victorian Clinical Genetics Services (AU), Sydney Children’s Hospitals Network (AU)
University of Tasmania, University of Wollongong
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Genomics and Rare Diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.