This week, a group of editors of biomedical journals — including the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Nature Genetics, American Journal of Human Genetics, Genetics in Medicine, Human Genetics and Genomics Advances, American Journal of Medical Genetics, and Journal of Genetic Counseling — announced new guidance for how biomedical researchers should use race, ethnicity, and ancestry labels in their published work. The guidance is based largely on recommendations from the 2023 National Academies report Using Population Descriptors in Genetics and Genomics Research: A New Framework for an Evolving Field. 

“Population descriptors such as race, ethnicity, and geographic origin should no longer be used as proxies for genetic ancestry groups in genomic science,” says a joint statement from the journal editors, with the exception of research exploring the impacts of racism or racial disparities. The new guidance offers 10 precepts for authors and reviewers of genomics research that uses population descriptors — including that terminology should be accurate and respectful; article titles and conclusions should avoid using race and ethnicity labels; and researchers should explain the limitations of legacy genomic data sets that use race and ethnicity labels.

In genomics research, race and ethnicity have a long history of being identified as the reason for differences among groups. Although race is a social concept, it is often used as a surrogate for describing human genetic differences, which can be misleading and inaccurate at best and harmful at worst, the National Academies report says.

The committee that wrote the 2023 report called upon the genetics and genomics research field to shift its thinking on the use of race, ethnicity, and ancestry terms. That effort should be led by key partners in genetics and genomics research, including scientific journals, the report said.

“Biomedical journals have a unique role in the translation and dissemination of genetic and genomic science to readers including researchers, clinicians, media, and the general public,” the new statement says. “As journal editors, we believe that it is incumbent on us to help bridge any emerging gap, thereby ensuring both the scientific accuracy and interpretability of journal content.”

In their statement, the editors acknowledge that setting new publication standards for genetics research will not solve broader discrepancies in how race and ethnicity are labeled in health and medical research as a whole. To that end, the National Academies have convened a committee to explore the use of race and ethnicity labels in biomedicine and provide recommendations to the scientific community. The report is expected to be released later this year.