Literature DB >> 25496155

Traditional and electronic informed consent for biobanking: a survey of U.S. biobanks.

Christian M Simon1, David W Klein, Helen A Schartz.   

Abstract

Biobanks face unique challenges obtaining consent from biospecimen contributors. Electronic consent (e-consent) presents one option for streamlining the biobank consent process, and improving contributor understanding of consent information. An e-mail survey was conducted to establish the extent of current biobank e-consent and interest in future use of e-consent. A total of 235 biobanks were surveyed and 65 (28%) responded with a fully completed survey. Few of these 65 biobanks (8%) reported using e-consent; however, the majority (75%) were interested in e-consent. Many (48%) biobanks were in discussions with institutional stakeholders about using e-consent in the future. Anticipated benefits of e-consent included improved efficiency and increased enrollment. Perceived barriers to e-consent adoption included lack of funding, issues with human subjects approval, and factors affecting user uptake (e.g., computer literacy). Biobanks using e-consent reported cost, technology issues, and difficulty training staff as barriers to e-consent adoption. Traditional consenting methods (e.g., face-to-face, phone, and mail) continued to be used at biobanks reporting use of e-consent. The survey results suggest strong interest in e-consent among U.S. biobanks, and a need to consider a range of implementation issues, including user preferences and receptivity; institutional and technical support; integration with clinical data networks; electronic signature capture; and what type of e-consent to implement. Biobanks will need evidence-based guidance for purposes of addressing these issues, so that e-consent processes enhance efficiency, as well as contributor receptivity, understanding, and trust.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25496155     DOI: 10.1089/bio.2014.0045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank        ISSN: 1947-5543            Impact factor:   2.300


  12 in total

1.  Online Education and e-Consent for GeneScreen, a Preventive Genomic Screening Study.

Authors:  R Jean Cadigan; Rita Butterfield; Christine Rini; Margaret Waltz; Kristine J Kuczynski; Kristin Muessig; Katrina A B Goddard; Gail E Henderson
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2017-10-26       Impact factor: 2.000

2.  Facilitating Informed Permission/Assent/Consent in Pediatric Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Susan M Abdel-Rahman
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 3.022

3.  Evaluation of a REDCap-based Workflow for Supporting Federal Guidance for Electronic Informed Consent.

Authors:  Cindy Chen; Scott P Turner; Evan T Sholle; Scott W Brown; Vanessa L I Blau; Julianna P Brouwer; Alicia N Lewis; Curtis L Cole; David M Nanus; Manish A Shah; John P Leonard; Thomas R Campion
Journal:  AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc       Date:  2019-05-06

4.  Communicating With Diverse Patients About Participating in a Biobank: A Randomized Multisite Study Comparing Electronic and Face-to-Face Informed Consent Processes.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Kai Wang; Laura A Shinkunas; Daniel T Stein; Paul Meissner; Maureen Smith; Rebecca Pentz; David W Klein
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2021-08-19       Impact factor: 1.742

5.  Development and Pilot of a REDCap Electronic Informed Consent Form for Research: An Example from the ROPE Study.

Authors:  Jesse M Weiss; Heather A Davis; Ann Marie McCarthy; Mark K Santillan; Debra S Brandt; Donna A Santillan
Journal:  J Inform Nurs       Date:  2021

6.  Modeling Clinical Processes to Consent Research Donors of Remnant Biospecimens in an Outpatient Cardiology Clinic.

Authors:  Stephanie E Soares; Nicholas R Anderson; Leslie J Solis; Javier E López
Journal:  Biopreserv Biobank       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 2.300

7.  Interactive multimedia consent for biobanking: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; David W Klein; Helen A Schartz
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Improving biobank consent comprehension: a national randomized survey to assess the effect of a simplified form and review/retest intervention.

Authors:  Laura M Beskow; Li Lin; Carrie B Dombeck; Emily Gao; Kevin P Weinfurt
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  iCONCUR: informed consent for clinical data and bio-sample use for research.

Authors:  Hyeoneui Kim; Elizabeth Bell; Jihoon Kim; Amy Sitapati; Joe Ramsdell; Claudiu Farcas; Dexter Friedman; Stephanie Feudjio Feupe; Lucila Ohno-Machado
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 10.  Remote Methods for Conducting Tobacco-Focused Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Jennifer Dahne; Rachel L Tomko; Erin A McClure; Jihad S Obeid; Matthew J Carpenter
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2020-12-12       Impact factor: 4.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.