Literature DB >> 22408238

Turning residual human biological materials into research collections: playing with consent.

Eugenijus Gefenas1, Vilius Dranseika, Jurate Serepkaite, Asta Cekanauskaite, Luciana Caenazzo, Bert Gordijn, Renzo Pegoraro, Elizabeth Yuko.   

Abstract

This article focuses on three scenarios in which residual biological materials are turned into research collections during the procedure of procuring these materials for diagnostic, therapeutic or other non-research purposes. These three scenarios differ from each other primarily because they employ different models of consent: (a) precautionary consent, which may be secured during the collecting procedure; (b) the presumed consent model, which may be applied during the collection of materials; and (c) consent for research use of identifiable human biological materials, which may be skipped entirely. These scenarios offer additional sources of biological samples for research purposes and at the same time seem to offer even more flexibility in terms of stringency of consent as compared with the more traditional models of broad consent in prospective research collections and the waiver of consent in retrospective research. Our discussion leads us to think that precautionary consent is preferable to presumed consent and no consent when handling issues of consent in the use of residual human biological materials for research. However, such precautionary consent should not be construed as blanket, unrestricted consent for any future use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22408238     DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2011-100113

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  14 in total

1.  Letter to the Editor. Progress in morgues: the time has come for a wide network of forensic research biobanks.

Authors:  Pamela Tozzo; Francesco Angiola; Luciana Caenazzo
Journal:  Int J Legal Med       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 2.686

2.  Consenting postpartum women for use of routinely collected biospecimens and/or future biospecimen collection.

Authors:  Claudia A Kozinetz; Kathryn Royse; Sarah C Graham; Xiaoying Yu; Jack Moye; Beatrice J Selwyn; Michele R Forman; Chantal Caviness
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2016-02-11

3.  Oocyte Biobanks: Old Assumptions and New Challenges.

Authors:  Pamela Tozzo
Journal:  BioTech (Basel)       Date:  2021-02-18

4.  The Future of Biobanking: What Is Next?

Authors:  Luciana Caenazzo; Pamela Tozzo
Journal:  BioTech (Basel)       Date:  2020-11-23

5.  Inclusion of residual tissue in biobanks: opt-in or opt-out?

Authors:  Noor A A Giesbertz; Annelien L Bredenoord; Johannes J M van Delden
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 8.029

6.  Biobanking research on oncological residual material: a framework between the rights of the individual and the interest of society.

Authors:  Luciana Caenazzo; Pamela Tozzo; Renzo Pegoraro
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2013-04-02       Impact factor: 2.652

7.  The moral concerns of biobank donors: the effect of non-welfare interests on willingness to donate.

Authors:  Raymond G De Vries; Tom Tomlinson; H Myra Kim; Chris D Krenz; Kerry A Ryan; Nicole Lehpamer; Scott Y H Kim
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2016-03-11

8.  Analysis of human tissue management models for medical research: preparation for implementation of the 2012 revision of the Bioethics and Safety Act of Korea.

Authors:  Young-Joon Ryu; Hankyeom Kim; Sejin Jang; Young-Mo Koo
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 2.153

9.  Croatian National Centre for Biobanking--a new perspective in biobanks governance?

Authors:  Ana Borovečki; Luciana Caenazzo; Davor Ježek; Monika Karija-Vlahović; Branka Golubić
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 1.351

10.  Consent Codes: Upholding Standard Data Use Conditions.

Authors:  Stephanie O M Dyke; Anthony A Philippakis; Jordi Rambla De Argila; Dina N Paltoo; Erin S Luetkemeier; Bartha M Knoppers; Anthony J Brookes; J Dylan Spalding; Mark Thompson; Marco Roos; Kym M Boycott; Michael Brudno; Matthew Hurles; Heidi L Rehm; Andreas Matern; Marc Fiume; Stephen T Sherry
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 5.917

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.