Literature DB >> 32737438

Demographic and prosocial intrapersonal characteristics of biobank participants and refusers: the findings of a survey in the Netherlands.

Reinder Broekstra1,2, Judith Aris-Meijer3, Els Maeckelberghe4, Ronald Stolk3, Sabine Otten5.   

Abstract

Research in genetics relies heavily on voluntary contributions of personal data. We aimed to acquire insights into the differences between participants and refusers of participation in a Dutch population-based biobank. Accordingly, we assessed the demographic and prosocial intrapersonal characteristics of respondents who participated (n = 2615) or refused to participate (n = 404) in the Lifelines biobank and databank. Our results indicated that health-related values critically influence participation decisions. The participation threshold for Lifelines was determined by an absence of health-related values and of trust in government. Therefore, considering these factors in communication and recruitment strategies could enhance participation in biomedical research. No indications were found of a stronger general prosociality of participants or their trust in researchers beyond the context of biobanking. This emphasizes the contextual understanding of the decision of participation in biobanking. Our findings may contribute to improving recruitment strategies by incorporating relevant values and/or highlighting prosocial benefits. Moreover, they foreground the need to address trust issues in collaborations between data repositories and commercial companies. Future research should explore how prosocial intrapersonal characteristics drive participation and withdrawal decisions and relate to contextual attributes.

Entities:  

Year:  2020        PMID: 32737438      PMCID: PMC7852517          DOI: 10.1038/s41431-020-0701-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  21 in total

1.  Publics and biobanks: Pan-European diversity and the challenge of responsible innovation.

Authors:  George Gaskell; Herbert Gottweis; Johannes Starkbaum; Monica M Gerber; Jacqueline Broerse; Ursula Gottweis; Abbi Hobbs; Ilpo Helén; Maria Paschou; Karoliina Snell; Alexandra Soulier
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey.

Authors:  Christine R Critchley; Dianne Nicol; Margaret F A Otlowski; Mark J A Stranger
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2010-10-05       Impact factor: 3.367

3.  Factors influencing public participation in biobanking.

Authors:  Mamoun Ahram; Areej Othman; Manal Shahrouri; Ebtihal Mustafa
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 4.  Thinking big: large-scale collaborative research in observational epidemiology.

Authors:  Alexander Thompson
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think?

Authors:  Asa Kettis-Lindblad; Lena Ring; Eva Viberth; Mats G Hansson
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2005-10-05       Impact factor: 3.367

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

Authors:  Christine Critchley; Dianne Nicol; Margaret Otlowski
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 2.000

7.  Modernizing Research Regulations Is Not Enough: It's Time to Think Outside the Regulatory Box.

Authors:  Suzanne M Rivera; Kyle B Brothers; R Jean Cadigan; Heather L Harrell; Mark A Rothstein; Richard R Sharp; Aaron J Goldenberg
Journal:  Am J Bioeth       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 11.229

8.  Attitudes of publics who are unwilling to donate DNA data for research.

Authors:  Anna Middleton; Richard Milne; Adrian Thorogood; Erika Kleiderman; Emilia Niemiec; Barbara Prainsack; Lauren Farley; Paul Bevan; Claire Steed; James Smith; Danya Vears; Jerome Atutornu; Heidi C Howard; Katherine I Morley
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2018-11-23       Impact factor: 2.708

9.  Trust in genomic data sharing among members of the general public in the UK, USA, Canada and Australia.

Authors:  Richard Milne; Katherine I Morley; Heidi Howard; Emilia Niemiec; Dianne Nicol; Christine Critchley; Barbara Prainsack; Danya Vears; James Smith; Claire Steed; Paul Bevan; Jerome Atutornu; Lauren Farley; Peter Goodhand; Adrian Thorogood; Erika Kleiderman; Anna Middleton
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2019-09-17       Impact factor: 4.132

10.  Subjects matter: a survey of public opinions about a large genetic cohort study.

Authors:  David Kaufman; Juli Murphy; Joan Scott; Kathy Hudson
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  7 in total

1.  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

2.  Willingness of Older Canadians with HIV to Participate in HIV Cure Research Near and After the End of Life: A Mixed-Method Study.

Authors:  David Lessard; Karine Dubé; Martin Bilodeau; Patrick Keeler; Shari Margolese; Ron Rosenes; Liliya Sinyavskaya; Madeleine Durand; Erika Benko; Colin Kovacs; Charlotte Guerlotté; Wangari Tharao; Keresa Arnold; Renée Masching; Darien Taylor; José Sousa; Mario Ostrowski; Jeff Taylor; Andy Kaytes; Davey Smith; Sara Gianella; Nicolas Chomont; Jonathan B Angel; Jean-Pierre Routy; Éric A Cohen; Bertrand Lebouché; Cecilia T Costiniuk
Journal:  AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 1.723

3.  Secondary research use of personal medical data: patient attitudes towards data donation.

Authors:  Gesine Richter; Christoph Borzikowsky; Bimba Franziska Hoyer; Matthias Laudes; Michael Krawczak
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2021-12-15       Impact factor: 2.652

Review 4.  Biobanking and risk assessment: a comprehensive typology of risks for an adaptive risk governance.

Authors:  Kaya Akyüz; Gauthier Chassang; Melanie Goisauf; Łukasz Kozera; Signe Mezinska; Olga Tzortzatou; Michaela Th Mayrhofer
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2021-12-13

5.  Motives for withdrawal of participation in biobanking and participants' willingness to allow linkages of their data.

Authors:  Reinder Broekstra; Judith L Aris-Meijer; Els L M Maeckelberghe; Ronald P Stolk; Sabine Otten
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-11-22       Impact factor: 4.246

6.  COVID-19 Surveillance in the Biobank at the Colorado Center for Personalized Medicine: Observational Study.

Authors:  Randi K Johnson; Katie M Marker; Jan T Lowery; Christopher R Gignoux; David Mayer; Jonathan Shortt; David Kao; Kathleen C Barnes
Journal:  JMIR Public Health Surveill       Date:  2022-06-13

7.  Associations between the Willingness to Donate Samples to Biobanks and Selected Psychological Variables.

Authors:  Jakub Pawlikowski; Michał Wiechetek; Anita Majchrowska
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 3.390

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.