Literature DB >> 25790760

The impact of commercialisation and genetic data sharing arrangements on public trust and the intention to participate in biobank research.

Christine Critchley1, Dianne Nicol, Margaret Otlowski.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The necessity for biobanks to share their resources with third parties poses potential risks to public trust and the intention to participate in genetic research. We explore the effects of data sharing and the type of third-party access (public vs. private) on public trust and, in turn, the intention to participate in biobank research.
METHODS: An experimental design was used to assess a national sample of 1,701 Australians via a computer-assisted telephone interview.
RESULTS: The results revealed that trust and the intention to participate significantly decreased in relation to private compared to public biobanks, and when access to third-party researchers was allowed compared to when it was not. Somewhat surprisingly, no differences were found in relation to the third party being international compared to Australian, but trust and the intention to participate were significantly eroded when private third parties were allowed access. Those with a university education were particularly distrustful of private biobanks and biobanks that allowed access, while those who were more aware of genetic databases appeared more confident with biobanks sharing with private-sector third parties.
CONCLUSION: The pattern of results suggests that public awareness of the need for biobanks to share their resources widely needs to be increased to maintain public trust and support.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25790760     DOI: 10.1159/000375441

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  24 in total

1.  Participation in Genetic Research: Amazon's Mechanical Turk Workforce in the United States and India.

Authors:  Susan W Groth; Ann Dozier; Margaret Demment; Dongmei Li; I Diana Fernandez; Jack Chang; Timothy Dye
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2016-11-04       Impact factor: 2.000

2.  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

3.  Hopeful and Concerned: Public Input on Building a Trustworthy Medical Information Commons.

Authors:  Patricia A Deverka; Dierdre Gilmore; Jennifer Richmond; Zachary Smith; Rikki Mangrum; Barbara A Koenig; Robert Cook-Deegan; Angela G Villanueva; Mary A Majumder; Amy L McGuire
Journal:  J Law Med Ethics       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 1.718

Review 4.  Has the biobank bubble burst? Withstanding the challenges for sustainable biobanking in the digital era.

Authors:  Don Chalmers; Dianne Nicol; Jane Kaye; Jessica Bell; Alastair V Campbell; Calvin W L Ho; Kazuto Kato; Jusaku Minari; Chih-Hsing Ho; Colin Mitchell; Fruzsina Molnár-Gábor; Margaret Otlowski; Daniel Thiel; Stephanie M Fullerton; Tess Whitton
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 2.652

5.  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

6.  Improving the informed consent process in international collaborative rare disease research: effective consent for effective research.

Authors:  Sabina Gainotti; Cathy Turner; Simon Woods; Anna Kole; Pauline McCormack; Hanns Lochmüller; Olaf Riess; Volker Straub; Manuel Posada; Domenica Taruscio; Deborah Mascalzoni
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  Dynamic Consent: a potential solution to some of the challenges of modern biomedical research.

Authors:  Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Harriet J A Teare; Jane Kaye; Stephan Beck; Heidi Beate Bentzen; Luciana Caenazzo; Clive Collett; Flavio D'Abramo; Heike Felzmann; Teresa Finlay; Muhammad Kassim Javaid; Erica Jones; Višnja Katić; Amy Simpson; Deborah Mascalzoni
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2017-01-25       Impact factor: 2.652

8.  Young people's awareness on biobanking and DNA profiling: results of a questionnaire administered to Italian university students.

Authors:  Pamela Tozzo; Antonio Fassina; Luciana Caenazzo
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2017-06-10

9.  Demonstrating trustworthiness when collecting and sharing genomic data: public views across 22 countries.

Authors:  Richard Milne; Katherine I Morley; Mohamed A Almarri; Shamim Anwer; Jerome Atutornu; Elena E Baranova; Paul Bevan; Maria Cerezo; Yali Cong; Alessia Costa; Christine Critchley; Josepine Fernow; Peter Goodhand; Qurratulain Hasan; Aiko Hibino; Gry Houeland; Heidi C Howard; S Zakir Hussain; Charlotta Ingvoldstad Malmgren; Vera L Izhevskaya; Aleksandra Jędrzejak; Cao Jinhong; Megumi Kimura; Erika Kleiderman; Brandi Leach; Keying Liu; Deborah Mascalzoni; Álvaro Mendes; Jusaku Minari; Dianne Nicol; Emilia Niemiec; Christine Patch; Jack Pollard; Barbara Prainsack; Marie Rivière; Lauren Robarts; Jonathan Roberts; Virginia Romano; Haytham A Sheerah; James Smith; Alexandra Soulier; Claire Steed; Vigdis Stefànsdóttir; Cornelia Tandre; Adrian Thorogood; Torsten H Voigt; Nan Wang; Anne V West; Go Yoshizawa; Anna Middleton
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 11.117

10.  Attitudes towards personal genomics among older Swiss adults: An exploratory study.

Authors:  Laura Mählmann; Christina Röcke; Angela Brand; Ernst Hafen; Effy Vayena
Journal:  Appl Transl Genom       Date:  2016-02-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.