Literature DB >> 33583200

Data Sharing Under the General Data Protection Regulation: Time to Harmonize Law and Research Ethics?

Antonia Vlahou1, Dara Hallinan2, Rolf Apweiler3, Angel Argiles4, Joachim Beige5, Ariela Benigni6, Rainer Bischoff7, Peter C Black8, Franziska Boehm2, Jocelyn Céraline9, George P Chrousos10, Christian Delles11, Pieter Evenepoel12, Ivo Fridolin13, Griet Glorieux14, Alain J van Gool15, Isabel Heidegger16, John P A Ioannidis17, Joachim Jankowski18, Vera Jankowski18, Carmen Jeronimo19, Ashish M Kamat20, Rosalinde Masereeuw21, Gert Mayer22, Harald Mischak23, Alberto Ortiz24, Giuseppe Remuzzi6, Peter Rossing25, Joost P Schanstra26, Bernd J Schmitz-Dräger27, Goce Spasovski28, Jan A Staessen29, Dimitrios Stamatialis30, Peter Stenvinkel31, Christoph Wanner32, Stephen B Williams33, Faiez Zannad34, Carmine Zoccali35, Raymond Vanholder36.   

Abstract

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) became binding law in the European Union Member States in 2018, as a step toward harmonizing personal data protection legislation in the European Union. The Regulation governs almost all types of personal data processing, hence, also, those pertaining to biomedical research. The purpose of this article is to highlight the main practical issues related to data and biological sample sharing that biomedical researchers face regularly, and to specify how these are addressed in the context of GDPR, after consulting with ethics/legal experts. We identify areas in which clarifications of the GDPR are needed, particularly those related to consent requirements by study participants. Amendments should target the following: (1) restricting exceptions based on national laws and increasing harmonization, (2) confirming the concept of broad consent, and (3) defining a roadmap for secondary use of data. These changes will be achieved by acknowledged learned societies in the field taking the lead in preparing a document giving guidance for the optimal interpretation of the GDPR, which will be finalized following a period of commenting by a broad multistakeholder audience. In parallel, promoting engagement and education of the public in the relevant issues (such as different consent types or residual risk for re-identification), on both local/national and international levels, is considered critical for advancement. We hope that this article will open this broad discussion involving all major stakeholders, toward optimizing the GDPR and allowing a harmonized transnational research approach.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ethics, Research; Government Regulation; biomedical research; data management; informed consent

Year:  2021        PMID: 33583200      PMCID: PMC7968961          DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.16340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hypertension        ISSN: 0194-911X            Impact factor:   10.190


  27 in total

1.  Using and producing publicly available genomic data to accelerate discovery in nephrology.

Authors:  Matthew G Sampson; Hyun Min Kang
Journal:  Nat Rev Nephrol       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 28.314

2.  Are Requirements to Deposit Data in Research Repositories Compatible With the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation?

Authors:  Deborah Mascalzoni; Heidi Beate Bentzen; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Lee Andrew Bygrave; Jessica Bell; Edward S Dove; Christian Fuchsberger; Kristian Hveem; Michaela Th Mayrhofer; Viviana Meraviglia; David R O'Brien; Cristian Pattaro; Peter P Pramstaller; Vojin Rakic; Alessandra Rossini; Mahsa Shabani; Dan Jerker B Svantesson; Marta Tomasi; Lars Ursin; Matthias Wjst; Jane Kaye
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-02-12       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 3.  A template for broad consent in biobank research. Results and explanation of an evidence and consensus-based development process.

Authors:  D Strech; S Bein; M Brumhard; W Eisenmenger; C Glinicke; T Herbst; R Jahns; S von Kielmansegg; G Schmidt; J Taupitz; H D Tröger
Journal:  Eur J Med Genet       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 2.708

4.  Assessing data protection and governance in health information systems: a novel methodology of Privacy and Ethics Impact and Performance Assessment (PEIPA).

Authors:  Concetta Tania Di Iorio; Fabrizio Carinci; Jillian Oderkirk; David Smith; Manuela Siano; Dorotea Alessandra de Marco; Simon de Lusignan; Paivi Hamalainen; Massimo Massi Benedetti
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  DataSHIELD: taking the analysis to the data, not the data to the analysis.

Authors:  Amadou Gaye; Yannick Marcon; Julia Isaeva; Philippe LaFlamme; Andrew Turner; Elinor M Jones; Joel Minion; Andrew W Boyd; Christopher J Newby; Marja-Liisa Nuotio; Rebecca Wilson; Oliver Butters; Barnaby Murtagh; Ipek Demir; Dany Doiron; Lisette Giepmans; Susan E Wallace; Isabelle Budin-Ljøsne; Carsten Oliver Schmidt; Paolo Boffetta; Mathieu Boniol; Maria Bota; Kim W Carter; Nick deKlerk; Chris Dibben; Richard W Francis; Tero Hiekkalinna; Kristian Hveem; Kirsti Kvaløy; Sean Millar; Ivan J Perry; Annette Peters; Catherine M Phillips; Frank Popham; Gillian Raab; Eva Reischl; Nuala Sheehan; Melanie Waldenberger; Markus Perola; Edwin van den Heuvel; John Macleod; Bartha M Knoppers; Ronald P Stolk; Isabel Fortier; Jennifer R Harris; Bruce H R Woffenbuttel; Madeleine J Murtagh; Vincent Ferretti; Paul R Burton
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 7.196

6.  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

Review 7.  Conclusion: harmonisation in genomic and health data sharing for research: an impossible dream?

Authors:  David Townend
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 4.132

8.  Towards a data sharing culture: recommendations for leadership from academic health centers.

Authors:  Heather A Piwowar; Michael J Becich; Howard Bilofsky; Rebecca S Crowley
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 9.  Relevance of Multi-Omics Studies in Cardiovascular Diseases.

Authors:  Paola Leon-Mimila; Jessica Wang; Adriana Huertas-Vazquez
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-07-17

10.  Broad consent under the GDPR: an optimistic perspective on a bright future.

Authors:  Dara Hallinan
Journal:  Life Sci Soc Policy       Date:  2020-01-06
View more
  4 in total

1.  Controversies between regulations of research ethics and protection of personal data: informed consent at a cross-road.

Authors:  Eugenijus Gefenas; J Lekstutiene; V Lukaseviciene; M Hartlev; M Mourby; K Ó Cathaoir
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2021-11-17

2.  Computational tools for genomic data de-identification: facilitating data protection law compliance.

Authors:  Alexander Bernier; Hanshi Liu; Bartha Maria Knoppers
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 14.919

3.  The first major vaccination campaign against smallpox in Lombardy: the mass vaccination campaign against coronavirus…nothing new…only terminology.

Authors:  SIlvana Castaldi; Francesco Auxilia; Maria Antonella Piga; Cecilia Eugenia Gandolfi; Antonia Francesca Franchini; Alessandro Porro; Paolo Maria Galimberti
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2022-03-14

Review 4.  Automated insulin delivery: benefits, challenges, and recommendations. A Consensus Report of the Joint Diabetes Technology Working Group of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and the American Diabetes Association.

Authors:  Jennifer L Sherr; Lutz Heinemann; G Alexander Fleming; Richard M Bergenstal; Daniela Bruttomesso; Hélène Hanaire; Reinhard W Holl; John R Petrie; Anne L Peters; Mark Evans
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 10.460

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.