Literature DB >> 24485935

Sample and data sharing barriers in biobanking: consent, committees, and compromises.

Flora Colledge1, Kirsten Persson2, Bernice Elger1, David Shaw1.   

Abstract

The ability to exchange samples and data is crucial for the rapidly growth of biobanking. However, sharing is based on the assumption that the donor has given consent to a given use of her or his sample. Biobanking stakeholders, therefore, must choose 1 of 3 options: obtain general consent enabling multiple future uses before taking a sample from the donor, try to obtain consent again before sharing a previously obtained sample, or look for a legally endorsed way to share a sample without the donor's consent. In this study, we present the results of 36 semistructured qualitative interviews with Swiss biobanking stakeholders regarding these options and the role of ethics committees in the process of authorizing sharing. Our results show that despite a lack of legal or guideline-based barriers to general consent, some stakeholders and ethics committees have reservations about this method of consent. In most cases, however, a general consent form is already in use. Many interviewees describe processes involving the ethics committees as time-consuming and cumbersome and their requirements as too demanding for donors/patients. Greater awareness of donors' opinions and preferences and the content of guidelines and recommendations could therefore be helpful for a better justified perspective of biobanking stakeholders and ethical committee members, equally. Finally, it may be necessary to differentiate between procedures governing future samples, where general consent is clearly desirable, and the use of old yet still relevant samples, where the option of using them without consent can be highly beneficial for research.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biobank; Data sharing; Ethics committee; Informed consent; Sample sharing

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24485935     DOI: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2013.12.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Diagn Pathol        ISSN: 1092-9134            Impact factor:   2.090


  10 in total

1.  Sustainability in a Hospital-Based Biobank and University-Based DNA Biorepository: Strategic Roadmaps.

Authors:  Catherine Y Seiler; Jennifer Eschbacher; Robert Bowser; Joshua LaBaer
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.300

2.  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

3.  Researchers' Perspectives on Informed Consent and Ethical Review of Biobank Research in South Africa: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Erisa Mwaka; Lyn Horn
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 1.742

4.  Samples and data accessibility in research biobanks: an explorative survey.

Authors:  Marco Capocasa; Paolo Anagnostou; Flavio D'Abramo; Giulia Matteucci; Valentina Dominici; Giovanni Destro Bisol; Fabrizio Rufo
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 2.984

5.  How to responsibly acknowledge research work in the era of big data and biobanks: ethical aspects of the Bioresource Research Impact Factor (BRIF).

Authors:  Heidi Carmen Howard; Deborah Mascalzoni; Laurence Mabile; Gry Houeland; Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag; Anne Cambon-Thomsen
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2017-09-25

Review 6.  Enhancing Reuse of Data and Biological Material in Medical Research: From FAIR to FAIR-Health.

Authors:  Petr Holub; Florian Kohlmayer; Fabian Prasser; Michaela Th Mayrhofer; Irene Schlünder; Gillian M Martin; Sara Casati; Lefteris Koumakis; Andrea Wutte; Łukasz Kozera; Dominik Strapagiel; Gabriele Anton; Gianluigi Zanetti; Osman Ugur Sezerman; Maimuna Mendy; Dalibor Valík; Marialuisa Lavitrano; Georges Dagher; Kurt Zatloukal; GertJan B van Ommen; Jan-Eric Litton
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  The views, perspectives, and experiences of academic researchers with data sharing and reuse: A meta-synthesis.

Authors:  Laure Perrier; Erik Blondal; Heather MacDonald
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Biomedical Data Sharing Among Researchers: A Study from Jordan.

Authors:  Lina Al-Ebbini; Omar F Khabour; Karem H Alzoubi; Almuthanna K Alkaraki
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2020-11-23

9.  Pediatric biobanks and parents of disabled children associations opinions on establishing children repositories in developing countries.

Authors:  Svetlana Mykolaivna Gramatiuk; Irina Yuriivna Bagmut; Michael Ivanivich Sheremet; Karine Sargsyan; Alla Mironovna Yushko; Serhii Mykolaevich Filipchenko; Vitaliy Vasilyevich Maksymyuk; Volodimir Volodimirovich Tarabanchuk; Petro Vasilyevich Moroz; Andriy Ivanovich Popovich
Journal:  J Med Life       Date:  2021 Jan-Mar

Review 10.  Aspects of Modern Biobank Activity - Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Wiktor Paskal; Adriana M Paskal; Tomasz Dębski; Maciej Gryziak; Janusz Jaworowski
Journal:  Pathol Oncol Res       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 3.201

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.