Table 2.

Summary of responses to general survey questions about Secondary findings (SFs)

Statement in the survey	Data available n	Responses
		n	%
Attitude towards returning SFs. Research participants should:	657
Be given the option of deciding whether to have genetic SFs returned		524	79.9
Probably have the option of deciding whether to have genetic SFs returned		116	17.7
Not have the option of deciding whether to have genetic SFs returned		17	2.6
Should low-income countries (LICs) have different guidelines to high-income countries (HICs) for disclosing SFs?	659
Yes, because researchers from LICs might not have the resources to deal with SFs.		184	27.9
Yes, because research participants from LICs might not be able to afford treatment.		142	21.5
No, because countries that cannot deal with SFs should not start studies.		71	10.8
No, because research participants from countries that do not have the resources to deal with SFs should not participate in studies.		52	7.9
Other		210	31.9
Should South Africa have unique guidelines for returning SFs?	660
Yes, because South Africa does not have the same resources for dealing with SFs as other countries, therefore different guidelines are needed.		207	31.4
Yes, because there are many different types of people and cultures in South Africa, therefore unique guidelines are needed.		144	21.8
No, researchers from all countries should follow the same guidelines so that there is standardization and uniformity.		230	34.8
No, research should not be allowed to be conducted if the resources for dealing with SFs are not in place.		41	6.2
Other		38	5.8
SFs in genetic research may be inheritable. This could mean that the participant’s family members are also affected by the finding.	669
The participant is responsible for informing his family.		396	59.2
It is the researchers' responsibility to ensure the participant's family is informed.		138	20.6
It is not feasible for researchers to inform participants' families of SFs.		135	20.2