Literature DB >> 20648060

Hypothetical and factual willingness to participate in biobank research.

Linus Johnsson1, Gert Helgesson, Thorunn Rafnar, Ingibjorg Halldorsdottir, Kee-Seng Chia, Stefan Eriksson, Mats G Hansson.   

Abstract

In the debate on biobank regulation, arguments often draw upon findings in surveys on public attitudes. However, surveys on willingness to participate in research may not always predict actual participation rates. We compared hypothetical willingness as estimated in 11 surveys conducted in Sweden, Iceland, United Kingdom, Ireland, United States and Singapore to factual participation rates in 12 biobank studies. Studies were matched by country and approximate time frame. Of 22 pairwise comparisons, 12 suggest that factual willingness to participate in biobank research is greater than hypothetical, six indicate the converse relationship, and four are inconclusive. Factual donors, in particular when recruited in health care or otherwise face-to-face with the researcher, are possibly motivated by factors that are less influential in a hypothetical context, such as altruism, trust, and sense of duty. The value of surveys in assessing factual willingness may thus be limited.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20648060      PMCID: PMC2987483          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2010.106

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  23 in total

Review 1.  Nature and operation of attitudes.

Authors:  I Ajzen
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 24.137

2.  Motivating donors to genetic research? Anthropological reasons to rethink the role of informed consent.

Authors:  Klaus Hoeyer; Niels Lynöe
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2006

3.  Human tissue samples and ethics--attitudes of the general public in Sweden to biobank research.

Authors:  Tore Nilstun; Göran Hermerén
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2006

4.  Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think?

Authors:  Asa Kettis-Lindblad; Lena Ring; Eva Viberth; Mats G Hansson
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 3.367

5.  Factors associated with enrollment in cancer genetics research.

Authors:  Beth M Ford; James S Evans; Elena M Stoffel; Judith Balmaña; Meredith M Regan; Sapna Syngal
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Attitudes and perceptions of patients towards methods of establishing a DNA biobank.

Authors:  Jill M Pulley; Margaret M Brace; Gordon R Bernard; Dan R Masys
Journal:  Cell Tissue Bank       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 1.522

7.  Ownership and uses of human tissue: what are the opinions of surgical in-patients?

Authors:  R J Bryant; R F Harrison; R D Start; A S A Chetwood; A M Chesshire; M W R Reed; S S Cross
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2008-02-06       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study.

Authors:  David Kaufman; Juli Murphy; Joan Scott; Kathy Hudson
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 9.  Ethics and biobanks.

Authors:  M G Hansson
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Patients' refusal to consent to storage and use of samples in Swedish biobanks: cross sectional study.

Authors:  Linus Johnsson; Mats G Hansson; Stefan Eriksson; Gert Helgesson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2008-07-10
View more
  43 in total

Review 1.  Health professionals' opinions on supporting a cancer biobank: identification of barriers to combat biobanking pitfalls.

Authors:  Nicole J Caixeiro; Hei Lan Byun; Joseph Descallar; Janelle V Levesque; Paul de Souza; Cheok Soon Lee
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Public views on participating in newborn screening using genome sequencing.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Carolyn Barg; Celine Cressman; June C Carroll; Brenda J Wilson; Julian Little; Denise Avard; Michael Painter-Main; Judith Allanson; Yves Giguere; Pranesh Chakraborty
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Public Attitudes Toward Precision Medicine: A Nationwide Survey on Developing a National Cohort Program for Citizen Participation in the Republic of Korea.

Authors:  Hannah Kim; Hye Ryun Kim; Sumin Kim; Eugene Kim; So Yoon Kim; Hyun-Young Park
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 4.599

4.  Demographic differences in willingness to provide broad and narrow consent for biobank research.

Authors:  Altovise T Ewing; Lori A H Erby; Juli Bollinger; Eva Tetteyfio; Luisel J Ricks-Santi; David Kaufman
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.300

5.  Electronically ascertained extended pedigrees in breast cancer genetic counseling.

Authors:  V Stefansdottir; H Skirton; O Th Johannsson; H Olafsdottir; G H Olafsdottir; L Tryggvadottir; J J Jonsson
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Knowledge and willingness to provide research biospecimens among foreign-born Latinos using safety-net clinics.

Authors:  Christopher A Loffredo; Gheorghe Luta; Sherrie Wallington; Solomon B Makgoeng; Claire Selsky; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Lucile L Adams-Campbell
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2013-08

7.  Genetic research participation in a young adult community sample.

Authors:  Carla L Storr; Flora Or; William W Eaton; Nicholas Ialongo
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-06-20

8.  Balancing the risks and benefits of genomic data sharing: genome research participants' perspectives.

Authors:  J M Oliver; M J Slashinski; T Wang; P A Kelly; S G Hilsenbeck; A L McGuire
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2011-12-30       Impact factor: 2.000

9.  The MICHR Genomic DNA BioLibrary: An Empirical Study of the Ethics of Biorepository Development.

Authors:  Blake J Roessler; Nicholas H Steneck; Lisa Connally
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 1.742

10.  Perceptions of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases on biobanking.

Authors:  Millie D Long; R Jean Cadigan; Suzanne F Cook; Kaaren Haldeman; Kriste Kuczynski; Robert S Sandler; Christopher F Martin; Wenli Chen; Michael D Kappelman
Journal:  Inflamm Bowel Dis       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 5.325

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.