Literature DB >> 23893769

Community perspectives on public health biobanking: an analysis of community meetings on the Michigan BioTrust for Health.

Daniel B Thiel1, Tevah Platt, Jodyn Platt, Susan B King, Sharon L R Kardia.   

Abstract

Biobanks raise challenges for developing ethically sound and practicable consent policies. Biobanks comprised of dried bloodspots (DBS) left over from newborn screening, maintained for long-term storage, and potential secondary research applications are no exception. Michigan has been a leader in transforming its DBS collection, marketing its biobank of de-identified samples for health research use. The Michigan BioTrust for Health includes approximately 4 million unconsented retrospective samples collected as early as 1984 and prospective samples added since the fall of 2010 with blanket parental consent. We engaged Michigan citizens to ascertain public attitudes, knowledge, and beliefs about the BioTrust and informed consent. A convenience sampling of 393 participants from communities around the state of Michigan (oversampling for minority populations) participated in meetings addressing newborn screening, the BioTrust and informed consent, yielding quantitative and qualitative survey and discussion data. Participants affirmed the principle of voluntary informed participation in research and advocated for greater public awareness of the existence of the BioTrust. Most expressed support for the use of DBS for research and a desire for greater involvement in granting permission for research use. Opinions varied as to which specific research uses were acceptable. Participants indicated a desire for greater engagement, public awareness, and more active decision making on the part of biobank participants and parents. Diversity of opinion over which research areas were deemed acceptable problematizes the blanket consent model that currently applies to the BioTrust's prospective DBS collection and that could become the new norm for research using de-identified data under proposed changes to the Common Rule.

Entities:  

Year:  2013        PMID: 23893769      PMCID: PMC3955459          DOI: 10.1007/s12687-013-0162-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Community Genet        ISSN: 1868-310X


  21 in total

1.  Policy issues and stakeholder concerns regarding the storage and use of residual newborn dried blood samples for research.

Authors:  Erin Rothwell; Rebecca Anderson; Jeffrey Botkin
Journal:  Policy Polit Nurs Pract       Date:  2010-05-10

2.  Informed consent and biobanks.

Authors:  Ellen Wright Clayton
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 1.718

3.  "Broad" consent, exceptions to consent and the question of using biological samples for research purposes different from the initial collection purpose.

Authors:  Carlo Petrini
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 4.634

4.  The haystack is made of needles.

Authors:  Sharon F Terry; Robert Shelton; Greg Biggers; Dixie Baker; Kelly Edwards
Journal:  Genet Test Mol Biomarkers       Date:  2013-03

Review 5.  From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research.

Authors:  Jane Kaye; Liam Curren; Nick Anderson; Kelly Edwards; Stephanie M Fullerton; Nadja Kanellopoulou; David Lund; Daniel G MacArthur; Deborah Mascalzoni; James Shepherd; Patrick L Taylor; Sharon F Terry; Stefan F Winter
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2012-04-03       Impact factor: 53.242

6.  Biobanking, consent, and certificates of confidentiality: does the ANPRM muddy the water?

Authors:  Brett A Williams; Leslie E Wolf
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.718

7.  Assessing public attitudes on the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples: a focus group study.

Authors:  Erin Rothwell; Rebecca Anderson; Aaron Goldenberg; Michelle H Lewis; Louisa Stark; Matthew Burbank; Bob Wong; Jeffrey R Botkin
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-02-18       Impact factor: 4.634

8.  Power to the people: participant ownership of clinical trial data.

Authors:  Sharon F Terry; Patrick F Terry
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2011-02-09       Impact factor: 17.956

9.  Achieving a nationwide learning health system.

Authors:  Charles P Friedman; Adam K Wong; David Blumenthal
Journal:  Sci Transl Med       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 17.956

10.  Active choice but not too active: public perspectives on biobank consent models.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Jamie L'heureux; Jeffrey C Murray; Patricia Winokur; George Weiner; Elizabeth Newbury; Laura Shinkunas; Bridget Zimmerman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  17 in total

1.  Storage and use of Newborn Screening Blood Specimens for Research: Assessing Public Opinion in Illinois.

Authors:  Alexa Hart; Michael Petros; Joel Charrow; Claudia Nash; Catherine Wicklund
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Factors associated with participation by African Americans in a study of the genetics of glaucoma.

Authors:  Rupin Parikh; Laura O'Keefe; Rebecca Salowe; Makayla Mccoskey; Wei Pan; Prithvi Sankar; Eydie Miller-Ellis; Victoria Addis; Amanda Lehman; Maureen Maguire; Joan O'Brien
Journal:  Ethn Health       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 2.772

3.  Community Perceptions of Biobanking Participation: A Qualitative Study among Mexican-Americans in Three Texas Cities.

Authors:  Natalia I Heredia; Sarah Krasny; Larkin L Strong; Laura Von Hatten; Lynne Nguyen; Belinda M Reininger; Lorna H McNeill; María E Fernández
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 2.000

4.  National survey and community advisory board development for a bipolar disorder biobank.

Authors:  Mark A Frye; Allen Doederlein; Barbara Koenig; Susan L McElroy; Malik Nassan; Lisa R Seymour; Joanna M Biernacka; Allen S Daniels
Journal:  Bipolar Disord       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 6.744

5.  'Cool! and creepy': engaging with college student stakeholders in Michigan's biobank.

Authors:  Tevah Platt; Jodyn Platt; Daniel B Thiel; Nicole Fisher; Sharon L R Kardia
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-06-12

6.  Disparities in knowledge and willingness to donate research biospecimens: a mixed-methods study in an underserved urban community.

Authors:  Chiranjeev Dash; Sherrie F Wallington; Sherieda Muthra; Everett Dodson; Jeanne Mandelblatt; Lucile L Adams-Campbell
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-04-26

7.  Testing an online, dynamic consent portal for large population biobank research.

Authors:  Daniel B Thiel; Jodyn Platt; Tevah Platt; Susan B King; Nicole Fisher; Robert Shelton; Sharon L R Kardia
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 2.000

8.  Engaging a state: Facebook comments on a large population biobank.

Authors:  Tevah Platt; Jodyn Platt; Daniel Thiel; Sharon L R Kardia
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-04-05

9.  Differences in preferences for models of consent for biobanks between Black and White women.

Authors:  Katherine M Brown; Bettina F Drake; Sarah Gehlert; Leslie E Wolf; James DuBois; Joann Seo; Krista Woodward; Hannah Perkins; Melody S Goodman; Kimberly A Kaphingst
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2015-08-25

10.  Increasing participation in genomic research and biobanking through community-based capacity building.

Authors:  Elizabeth Gross Cohn; Maryam Husamudeen; Elaine L Larson; Janet K Williams
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.