期刊
GENETICS IN MEDICINE
卷 18, 期 7, 页码 663-671出版社
NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2015.138
关键词
biobank; broad consent; data sharing; systematic review; tiered consent
资金
- National Human Genome Research Institute [U01HG006828, U01HG006830, U01HG006389, U01HG006382, U01HG006375, U01HG006379, U01HG006380, U01HG006388, U01HG006378, U01HG006385]
- eMERGE Consent, Education, Regulation, and Consultation (CERC)
proposed that de-identified human data and specimens be included in biobanks only if patients provide consent. The National Institutes of Health Genomic Data Sharing policy went into effect in 2015, requiring broad consent from almost all research participants. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature review of attitudes toward biobanking, broad consent, and data sharing. Bibliographic databases included MEDLINE, Web of Science, EthxWeb, and GenETHX. Study screening was conducted using DistillerSR. Results: The final 48 studies included surveys (n = 23), focus groups (n = 8), mixed methods (n = 14), interviews (n = 1), and consent form analyses (n = 2). Study quality was characterized as good (n = 19), fair (n = 27), and poor (n = 2). Although many participants objected, broad consent was often preferred over tiered or study-specific consent, particularly when broad consent was the only option, samples were de-identified, logistics of biobanks were communicated, and privacy was addressed. Willingness for data to be shared was high, but it was lower among individuals from under-represented minorities, individuals with privacy and confidentiality concerns, and when pharmaceutical companies had access to data. Conclusions: Additional research is needed to understand factors affecting willingness to give broad consent for biobank research and data sharing in order to address concerns to enhance acceptability.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据