Gail E. Henderson

About

Gail E. Henderson, PhD, is a professor of Social Medicine in the School of Medicine and an adjunct professor of Sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is a medical sociologist with training in public health, and has extensive experience with interdisciplinary research and teaching. Her research focuses on ethical, social, and policy issues related to genomics, clinical trials, biobanking, and global health, particularly in the context of HIV/AIDS and health care in China. Henderson has contributed to understanding perceptions of benefit in early phase gene transfer trials, the ethical challenges of large-scale biobanks, and the implications of genomic screening, including race/ethnicity considerations. She has also conducted significant work on health care systems and research ethics in China and other global health contexts. Her leadership roles include serving as Department Chair, director of the UNC Center for Genomics and Society, and co-director of the Center for AIDS Research International Core. She has been involved in editorial and advisory capacities, including as the Ethical, Legal and Social Implications (ELSI) Editor of Genetics in Medicine and a member of the NHGRI Advisory Council.

Research topics

• Political Science
• Public relations
• Sociology
• Biology
• Genetics
• Business
• Computer Science
• Psychology
• Law
• Engineering ethics

Selected publications

• Not all AI health tools with regulatory authorization are clinically validated

  Nature Medicine · 2024-08-26 · 58 citations

  articleSenior author
  PublisherDOI

• The Rise of Population Genomic Screening: Characteristics of Current Programs and the Need for Evidence Regarding Optimal Implementation

  Journal of Personalized Medicine · 2022 · 55 citations

  Senior authorCorresponding

  PURPOSE: Advances in clinical genomic sequencing capabilities, including reduced costs and knowledge gains, have bolstered the consideration of genomic screening in healthy adult populations. Yet, little is known about the existing landscape of genomic screening programs in the United States. It can be difficult to find information on current implementation efforts and best practices, particularly in light of critical questions about equity, cost, and benefit. METHODS: In 2020, we searched publi…

  DOI

• The Promise and Reality of Public Engagement in the Governance of Human Genome Editing Research

  The American Journal of Bioethics · 2023 · 38 citations

  Senior authorCorresponding

  This paper analyses the activities of five organizations shaping the debate over the global governance of genome editing in order to assess current approaches to public engagement (PE). We compare the recommendations of each group with its own practices. All recommend broad engagement with the general public, but their practices vary from expert-driven models dominated by scientists, experts, and civil society groups to citizen deliberation-driven models that feature bidirectional consultation w…

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• The Future of Bioethics: It Shouldn't Take a Pandemic

  The Hastings Center Report · 2020 · 13 citations

  Senior authorCorresponding

  The Covid-19 pandemic has concentrated bioethics attention on the "lifeboat ethics" of rationing and fair allocation of scarce medical resources, such as testing, intensive care unit beds, and ventilators. This focus drives ethics resources away from persistent and systemic problems-in particular, the structural injustices that give rise to health disparities affecting disadvantaged communities of color. Bioethics, long allied with academic medicine and highly attentive to individual decision-ma…

  DOI

• The View from the Benches: Scientists' Perspectives on the Uses and Governance of Human Gene-Editing Research

  The CRISPR Journal · 2021 · 10 citations

  The advent of human gene editing has stimulated international interest in how best to govern this research. However, research on stakeholder views has neglected scientists themselves. We surveyed 212 scientists who use gene editing in their work. Questions captured views on oversight and use of somatic and germline human gene editing for treatment, prevention, and enhancement. More respondents were supportive of somatic than germline editing, and more supported gene editing for treatment compare…

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

Recent grants

• North Carolina Clinical Genomic Evaluation by Next-gen Exome Sequencing 2

  NIH · $1.6M · 2011–2015

• NIH Grant R01HG005227

  NIH · $603k · 2012

• Integrating Decision Making Studies into HIV Cure Trials: A real-time longitudinal assessment

  NIH · $2.2M · 2016–2022

Frequent coauthors

• R. Jean Cadigan

  42 shared

• Nancy M. P. King

  Wake Forest University

  30 shared

• Arlene M. Davis

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  30 shared

• Larry R. Churchill

  Vanderbilt University Medical Center

  28 shared

• Benjamin S. Wilfond

  University of Washington

  27 shared

• Christine Rini

  24 shared

• Jonathan S. Berg

  University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

  24 shared

• Myron S. Cohen

  23 shared

Education

• B.A., Chinese Language and Literature

  Oberlin College

  1971

• M.A.

  University of Michigan

  1977

• Ph.D., Sociology

  University of Michigan

  1982

Similar researchers at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Krista M. Perreirah-53
• Ronald P. Straussh-44
• Sue E Estroffh-36