News24th April 2025

Nuffield Council on Bioethics raises ethical concerns about the use of polygenic indices as predictors in education

A new report from the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (NCOB) urges caution over the use of polygenic indices (PGI) data to inform educational policy and practice. We suggest next steps for policymakers and researchers considering the ethical acceptability of applying PGI research in these settings.

The mind & brainGenomics

Access to genomic testing, including via direct-to consumer companies, is increasing alongside growing political appetite for data-driven innovation. The translation of polygenic indices (PGIs) from research into healthcare has already raised ethical questions surrounding agency, equity, privacy and consent.

Our latest report shares findings from a workshop we convened with experts from across genomic science and policy, education, ethics and the social sciences to explore how these concerns might arise in education contexts, and to identify any education-specific ethical questions related to PGI use.

Workshop participants agreed that using PGI data in educational contexts does raise specific ethical questions, largely due to a tendency for PGIs to be perceived as overly deterministic, despite being poor predictors of individual outcomes. Although the predictive power of PGIs may improve as scientific capabilities advance, it remains unclear to what extent – and how quickly – this will happen. Ethical concerns also arise in relation to the potential harms that could be caused to a child if decisions about their trajectory through education are made based on PGI data and without their (or their parents’/carers’) consent.

There are also considerable risks that emerge that could reinforce existing inequities in society, contributing to further disadvantage for some individuals and groups, particularly given the lack of diversity in genomic datasets from which PGIs are generated. Improving the diversity of genomic datasets – and implementing specific safeguards – will therefore be essential first steps before the use of PGIs in educational policy and practice can be fully considered.

Participants noted that while some PGI data provides useful group-level insights, it is not a reliable enough indicator of individual outcomes to determine personalised, targeted interventions. It was agreed that further research is needed to better understand both the science of PGI mechanisms and the pathway from PGI to desired educational outcome. We also suggest that the development of robust evidence bases around PGI-based educational interventions will be needed before translation can be ethically considered.

Our report concludes that significant caution is needed prior to the integration of PGI research into educational policy and practice. We suggest that researchers and decision-makers engage with educators to better understand how current interventions are identified and implemented, and with parents and young people to gauge appetite for PGI-informed interventions in education.

We hope our report gives decision-makers a clear steer on the considerations that are needed to assess whether the real-world translation of PGIs into education is both practically feasible and ethically justifiable for current and future generations.”

Natalie Michaux, Research and Policy Manager at the Nuffield Council on Bioethics

This workshop followed the recent publication of our scoping report in collaboration with the Nuffield Foundation which provided an overview of scientific developments in genomic research relating to education and outlined some of the key challenges arising within this field.