Identifying public expectations of genetic biobanks

Australian Attitudes Towards Waivers of Consent Within the Context of Genomic Data Sharing

This research identifies the circumstances in which Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) are trusted by Australians to approve the use of genomic data - without express consent - and considers the impact of genomic data sharing settings, and respondent attributes, on public trust. Survey results (N = 3013) show some circumstances are more conducive to public trust than others, with waivers endorsed when future research is beneficial and when privacy is protected, but receiving less support in other instances. Still, results imply attitudes are influenced by more than these specific circumstances, with different data sharing settings, and participant attributes, affecting views. Ultimately, this research raises questions and concerns in relation to the criteria HRECs use when authorising waivers of consent in Australia.

A systematic literature review of the 'commercialisation effect' on public attitudes towards biobank and genomic data repositories

Initiatives that collect and share genomic data to advance health research are widespread and accelerating. Commercial interests in these efforts, while vital, may erode public trust and willingness to provide personal genomic data, upon which these initiatives depend. Understanding public attitudes towards providing genomic data for health research in the context of commercial involvement is critical. A PRISMA-guided search of six online academic databases identified 113 quantitative and qualitative studies using primary data pertaining to public attitudes towards commercial actors in the management, collection, access, and use of biobank and genomic data. The presence of commercial interests yields interrelated public concerns around consent, privacy and data security, trust in science and scientists, benefit sharing, and the ownership and control of health data. Carefully considered regulatory and data governance and access policies are therefore required to maintain public trust and support for genomic health initiatives.

Predicting Participation Willingness in Ecological Momentary Assessment of General Population Health and Behavior: Machine Learning Study

BACKGROUND

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is widely used in health research to capture individuals' experiences in the flow of daily life. The majority of EMA studies, however, rely on nonprobability sampling approaches, leaving open the possibility of nonrandom participation concerning the individual characteristics of interest in EMA research. Knowledge of the factors that predict participation in EMA research is required to evaluate this possibility and can also inform optimal recruitment strategies.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the extent to which being willing to participate in EMA research is related to respondent characteristics and to identify the most critical predictors of participation.

METHODS

We leveraged the availability of comprehensive data on a general young adult population pool of potential EMA participants and used and compared logistic regression, classification and regression trees, and random forest approaches to evaluate respondents' characteristic predictors of willingness to participate in the Decades-to-Minutes EMA study.

RESULTS

In unadjusted logistic regression models, gender, migration background, anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms, stress, and prosociality were significant predictors of participation willingness; in logistic regression models, mutually adjusting for all predictors, migration background, tobacco use, and social exclusion were significant predictors. Tree-based approaches also identified migration status, tobacco use, and prosociality as prominent predictors. However, overall, willingness to participate in the Decades-to-Minutes EMA study was only weakly predictable from respondent characteristics. Cross-validation areas under the curve for the best models were only in the range of 0.56 to 0.57.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that migration background is the single most promising target for improving EMA participation and sample representativeness; however, more research is needed to improve prediction of participation in EMA studies in health.

Context matters in genomic data sharing: a qualitative investigation into responses from the Australian public

BACKGROUND

Understanding public attitudes to genomic data sharing is widely seen as key in shaping effective governance. However, empirical research in this area often fails to capture the contextual nuances of diverse sharing practices and regulatory concerns encountered in real-world genomic data sharing. This study aimed to investigate factors affecting public attitudes to data sharing through responses to diverse genomic data sharing scenarios.

METHODS

A set of seven empirically validated genomic data sharing scenarios reflecting a range of current practices in Australia was used in an open-ended survey of a diverse sample of the Australian public (n = 243). Qualitative responses were obtained for each of the scenarios. Respondents were each allocated one scenario and asked five questions on: whether (and why/not) they would share data; what sharing would depend on; benefits and risks of sharing; risks they were willing to accept if sharing was certain to result in benefits; and what could increase their comfort about sharing and any potential risk. A thematic analysis was used to examine responses, coded and validated by two blinded coders.

RESULTS

Participants indicated an overall high willingness to share genomic information, although this willingness varied considerably between different scenarios. A strong perception of benefits was reported as the foremost explanation for willingness to share across all scenarios. The high degree of convergence in the perception of benefits and the types of benefits identified by participants across all the scenarios suggests that the differentiation in intention to share may lie in perceptions of risk, which showed distinct patterns within and between the different scenarios. Some concerns were shared strongly across all scenarios, particularly benefit sharing, future use, and privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Qualitative responses provide insight into popular assumptions regarding existing protections, conceptions of privacy, and which trade-offs are generally acceptable. Our results indicate that public attitudes and concerns are heterogeneous and influenced by the context in which sharing takes place. The convergence of key themes such as benefits and future uses point to core concerns that must be centred in regulatory responses to genomic data sharing.

Ethical Considerations in Research with Genomic Data

Our ability to generate genomic data is currently well ahead of our ability to understand what they mean, raising challenges about how best to engage with them. This article considers ethical aspects of work with such data, focussing on research contexts that are intertwined with clinical care. We discuss the identifying nature of genomic data, the medical information intrinsic within them, and their linking of people within a biological family. We go on to consider what this means for consent, the importance of thoughtful sharing of genomic data, the challenge of constructing meaningful findings, and the legacy of unequal representation in genomic datasets. We argue that the ongoing success of genomic data research relies on public trust in the enterprise: to justify this trust, we need to ensure robust stewarding, and wide engagement about the ethical issues inherent in such practices.

Benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research in Uganda: Perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members

Background: Genomic and biobanking research has increased in Africa over the past few years. This has raised pertinent ethical, legal, and societal concerns for stakeholders such as sample or data ownership, commercialization, and benefit sharing. There is limited awareness of the concept of benefit sharing by stakeholders in sub-Saharan Africa. Objective: This study aimed to explore the perceptions of researchers and research ethics committee members on benefit sharing in international collaborative genomic and biobanking research. Methods: Qualitative in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 researchers and 19 research ethics committee members. A thematic approach was used to interpret the results. Results: Six themes emerged from the data and these included perceptions on the benefits of genomic and biobanking research; discussion of benefit sharing with participants during the informed consent process; legal implications of benefit sharing and the role of material transfer agreements; equity and fairness in sharing the benefits of genomic research; perceived barriers to fair benefit sharing; and recommendations for fostering fair and equitable benefit sharing in genomic and biobanking research. Most respondents clearly understood the various forms of benefits of genomic and biobanking research and opined that such benefits should be fairly and equitably shared with low and middle-income country researchers and their institutions, and research communities. The perceived barriers to the fair benefit sharing unfavorable include power disparities, weak research regulatory frameworks, and lack of scientific integrity. Conclusion: Overall, respondents believed that the distribution of the advantages of genomic and biobanking research in North-South collaborative research was not equitable nor fair, and that the playing field was not leveled. Therefore, we advocate the following for fair and equitable benefit sharing: Building the capacities and empowering research scientists in developing nations; strengthening regulatory frameworks and extending the purview of the research ethics committee in the development and implementation of material transfer agreements; and meaningfully involving local research communities in benefit sharing negotiations.

Return of genomic results does not motivate intent to participate in research for all: Perspectives across 22 countries

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to determine how attitudes toward the return of genomic research results vary internationally.

METHODS

We analyzed the "Your DNA, Your Say" online survey of public perspectives on genomic data sharing including responses from 36,268 individuals across 22 low-, middle-, and high-income countries, and these were gathered in 15 languages. We analyzed how participants responded when asked whether return of results (RoR) would motivate their decision to donate DNA or health data. We examined variation across the study countries and compared the responses of participants from other countries with those from the United States, which has been the subject of the majority of research on return of genomic results to date.

RESULTS

There was substantial variation in the extent to which respondents reported being influenced by RoR. However, only respondents from Russia were more influenced than those from the United States, and respondents from 20 countries had lower odds of being partially or wholly influenced than those from the United States.

CONCLUSION

There is substantial international variation in the extent to which the RoR may motivate people's intent to donate DNA or health data. The United States may not be a clear indicator of global attitudes. Participants' preferences for return of genomic results globally should be considered.

The social aspects of genome editing: publics as stakeholders, populations and participants in animal research

The application of genome editing to animal research connects to a wide variety of policy concerns and public conversations. We suggest focusing narrowly on public opinion of genome editing is to overlook the range of positions from which people are brought into relationships with animal research through these technologies. In this paper, we explore three key roles that publics are playing in the development of genome editing techniques applied to animals in biomedical research. First, publics are positioned by surveys and focus groups as stakeholders with opinions that matter to the development of research technologies. Learning lessons from controversies over genetically modified food in Europe, these methods are used to identify problems in science-society relations that need to be managed. Second, people are recruited into research projects through participating in biobanks and providing data, where their contributions are encouraged by appeals to the public good and maintained by public confidence. Thirdly, patients are increasingly taking positions within research governance, as lay reviewers on funding panels, where their expertise helps align research priorities and practices with public expectations of research. These plural publics do not easily aggregate into a simple or singular public opinion on genome editing. We conclude by suggesting more attention is needed to the multiple roles that different publics expect - and are expected - to play in the future development of genomic technologies.

Perceived fairness of direct-to-consumer genetic testing business models

Although consumers and experts often express concerns regarding the questionable business practices of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing services (e.g., reselling of consumers' genetic data), the DTC genetic testing market keeps expanding rapidly. We employ retail fairness as our theoretical lens to address this seeming paradox and conduct a discrete choice experiment with 16 attributes to better understand consumers' fairness perceptions of DTC genetic testing business models. Our results suggest that, while consumers perceive privacy-preserving DTC genetic testing services fairer, price is the main driver for fairness perception. We contribute to research on consumer perceptions of DTC genetic testing by investigating consumer preferences of DTC genetic testing business models and respective attributes. Further, this research contributes to knowledge about disruptive business models in healthcare and retail fairness by contextualizing the concept of retail fairness in the DTC genetic testing market. We also demonstrate how to utilize discrete choice experiments to elicit perceived fairness.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12525-022-00571-x.

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

Data repositories, like research biobanks, seek to optimise the number of responding participants while simultaneously attempting to increase the amount of data donated per participant. Such efforts aim to increase the repository’s value for its uses in medical research to contribute to improve health care, especially when data linkage is permitted by participants. We investigated individuals’ motives for participating in such projects and potential reasons for their withdrawal from participation in a population-based biobank. In addition, we analysed how these motives were related to various characteristics of the participants and their willingness to permit data linkage to their personal data for research. These questions were explored using a sample of participants in the Dutch Lifelines biobank (n = 2615). Our results indicated that motives for participation and withdrawal were premised on benefits or harm to society and to the individuals themselves. Although general values and trust both played key roles in participation, potential withdrawal and willingness to permit data linkage, they were differentially associated with motives for participation and withdrawal. These findings support and nuance previous findings by highlighting the distinctiveness and complexity of decision making regarding participation in or withdrawal from data donation. We suggest some new directions for improving recruitment, retention and safeguarding strategies in biobanking. In addition, our data provide initial evidence regarding how factors may relate with the probability that individuals will agree to data linkages, when controlling for their unique effects. Future research should further investigate how perceptions of harm and benefits may influence decision making on withdrawal of participation.

Identifying the nature and extent of public and donor concern about the commercialisation of biobanks for genomic research

Various forms of private investment are considered necessary for the sustainability of biobanks, yet pose significant challenges to public trust. To manage this tension, it is vital to identify the concerns of relevant stakeholders to ensure effective and acceptable policy and practice. This research examines the aspects of commercialisation that are of most concern to the Australian public (n = 800) and patients who had donated their tissue to two large disease specific (cancer) public biobanks (n = 564). Overall, we found a commercialisation effect (higher support for public relative to private) in relation to funding, research location and access to stored biospecimens. The effect was strongest for research locations and access compared to funding. A latent class analysis revealed the pattern of concern differed, with the majority (34.1%) opposing all aspects of commercialisation, a minority supporting all (15.7%), one quarter (26.8%) opposing some (sharing and selling tissue) but not others (research locations and funding), and a group who were unsure about most aspects but opposed selling tissue (23.5%). Patient donors were found to be more accepting of and unsure about most aspects of commercialisation. Members of the (general) public who were motivated to participate in biobanking were more likely to oppose some aspects while supporting others, while those who indicated they would not donate to a biobank were more likely to oppose all aspects of commercialisation. The results suggest that approaches to policy, engagement and awareness raising need to be tailored for different publics and patient groups to increase participation.

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

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.

Examining diversity in public willingness to participate in offshore human biobanking: An Australian mixed methods study

To ensure their sustainability and scientific utility, human biobanks are networking internationally. Sharing biospecimens and associated data across jurisdictions raise a number of practical, ethical, legal and social challenges that could reduce the publics' willingness to donate their much needed tissue for research purposes. This research aims to identify the impact of biobank location on willingness to donate through a national quantitative survey (n = 750) and 16 in-depth interviews. A latent class analysis in combination with qualitative results suggests that a large proportion of Australians are willing to donate and/or allow their tissue to be stored offshore to help others, but others are reluctant due to uncertainty around foreign ethical and regulatory standards and the loss of potential local benefits. The results highlight for the first time the diversity of public views, and provide important guidance for policy makers and science communicators eager to tailor strategies for specific publics.

Public trust and global biobank networks

BACKGROUND

Biobanks provide an important foundation for genomic and personalised medicine. In order to enhance their scientific power and scope, they are increasingly becoming part of national or international networks. Public trust is essential in fostering public engagement, encouraging donation to, and facilitating public funding for biobanks. Globalisation and networking of biobanking may challenge this trust.

METHODS

We report the results of an Australian study examining public attitudes to the networking and globalisation of biobanks. The study used quantitative and qualitative methods in conjunction with bioethical analysis in order to determine factors that may contribute to, and threaten, trust.

RESULTS

Our results indicate a generally high level of trust in biobanks and in medical research more broadly. Key factors that can reduce perceived trustworthiness of biobanks are commercialisation and involvement in global networking.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that robust ethical oversight and governance standards can both promote trust in global biobanking and ensure that this trust is warranted.

Privacy Concerns About Personal Health Information and Fear of Unintended Use of Biospecimens Impact Donations by African American Patients

Biospecimen donation is essential for studies of cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. Donations from minority groups, for whom the cancer burden is high, are infrequent and inadequate for research purposes. The obstacles to donation of biospecimens by African Americans and other minority groups must be identified. Patients aged 18-85 years were surveyed based on the clinic visited (group A: GI/primary care and group B: oncology with confirmed cancer diagnosis) and analyzed as separate groups. The validated biobanking attitudes and knowledge survey (BANKS) as well as pancreatic cancer questions were used. In group A, 278/292 surveys were completed (5/6 patients participated). In group B, 54/59 surveys were completed (4/5 patients participated). There were low mean scores on the BANKS knowledge sections, specifically in regard to specimen ownership and the separation of research and medical records. Also, two major concerns limited donation: (1) fear that personal, medical, and family medical information may be stolen from the biobank; and (2) mistrust that biospecimens could be used for unintended purposes. Low knowledge about biospecimen acquisition, added to mistrust, warrant community-based, and patient education in an effort to improve attitudes, increase participation, and regain healthy therapeutic alliances.

Assessing the stability of biobank donor preferences regarding sample use: evidence supporting the value of dynamic consent

Dynamic consent has been proposed as a strategy for addressing the limitations of traditional, broad consent for biobank participation. Although the argument for dynamic consent has been made on theoretical grounds, empirical studies evaluating the potential utility of dynamic consent are needed to enhance deliberations about the merits of dynamic consent. Few studies have assessed such considerations as whether donor preferences may change over time or if participants would use a dynamic consent mechanism to modify preferences when they change. We administered a 66-item survey to participants in a large DNA biobank. The survey sought to gauge the stability of donor preferences specified at the time of biobank enrollment, specifically the stability of donors’ preference regarding posthumous availability of biospecimens to next-of-kin. We received 1164 completed surveys for a response rate of 72%. Forty percent of respondents indicated a preference regarding sample availability on the survey (T2) that was inconsistent with the preference they had expressed when they enrolled in the biobank (T1). Most (94%) individuals with inconsistent preferences regarding sample availability had initially restricted sample availability at T1 but were comfortable with broader availability when asked at the time of the survey (T2). Our findings demonstrate that preferences regarding sample use expressed at the time of enrollment in a DNA biobank may not be reliable indicators of donor preferences over time. These findings lend empirical support to the case for a dynamic consent model in which biobank participants are approached over time to clarify their views regarding sample use.

Trust in Centralized Large-Scale Data Repository: A Qualitative Analysis

Exponential increases in digital data and calls for participation in human research raise questions about when and why individuals voluntarily provide personal data. We conducted 36 in-depth interviews with ex-participants, participants, and nonparticipants in a biobank to identify key factors influencing trust in centralized large-scale data repository for human research. Our findings indicated that trust depends strongly on whether such data repository benefits the public, the interests of data collectors, the characteristics of the collected data, and application of informed consent for retaining control over personal data. Concerns about the aims and range of data repository appeared to influence withdrawal of participation. Our findings underscore ethical and practical issues relating to data collection and consent procedures in human research.

Data in question: A survey of European biobank professionals on ethical, legal and societal challenges of biobank research

Biobanks have evolved, and their governance procedures have undergone important transformations. Our paper examines this issue by focusing on the perspective of the professionals working in management or scientific roles in research-based biobanks, who have an important impact on shaping these transformations. In particular, it highlights that recent advances in molecular medicine and genomic research have raised a range of ethical, legal and societal implications (ELSI) related to biobank-based research, impacting directly on regulations and local practices of informed consent (IC), private-public partnerships (PPPs), and engagement of participants. In our study, we investigate the ways that these concerns influence biobanking practices and assess the level of satisfaction of the cross-national biobanking research communities with the ELSI related procedures that are currently in place. We conducted an online survey among biobankers and researchers to investigate secondary use of data, informing and/or re-contacting participants, sharing of data with third parties from industry, participant engagement, and collaboration with industrial partners. Findings highlight the need for a more inclusive and transparent biobanking practice where biobanks are seen in a more active role in providing information and communicating with participants; the need to improve the current IC procedures and the role of biobanks in sharing of samples and data with industry partners and different countries, and the need for practical, tangible and hands-on ethical and legal guidance.

From engaging publics to engaging knowledges: Enacting "appropriateness" in the Austrian biobank infrastructure

While there is consensus on the essential importance of public engagement in further developments of biobanking, the related investigation of public views predominantly focused on the concerns expressed by the publics, and the concrete formats of public engagement, without delving into the ways these concerns are constituted. In this article, we summarize recent research on public engagement in order to describe the constitution of respective concerns as "engagement of knowledges." By shifting the focus of analysis from "publics" to "knowledges," we draw attention to the interaction dynamic through which citizens embed the new knowledge they receive during expert interactions into the stock of knowledge they already possess. Analyzing our recent investigation of public views on biobanking in the form of citizen-expert panels in the Austrian infrastructure of biobanks (BBMRI.at), we trace this dynamic through citizens' recurrent concerns that the research and consent practices related to biobanking should be "appropriate."

Determinants of the willingness to participate in biobanking among Malaysian stakeholders in the Klang Valley

BACKGROUND

The demand in biobanking for the collection and maintenance of biological specimens and personal data from civilians to improve the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of diseases has increased notably. Despite the advancement, certain issues, specifically those related to privacy and data protection, have been critically discussed. The purposes of this study are to assess the willingness of stakeholders to participate in biobanking and to determine its predictors.

METHODS

A survey of 469 respondents from various stakeholder groups in the Klang Valley region of Malaysia was carried out. Based on previous research, a multi-dimensional instrument measuring willingness to participate in biobanking, and its predictors, was constructed and validated. A single step Structural Equation Modelling was performed to analyse the measurements and structural model using the International Business Machines Corporation Software Package for Social Sciences, Analysis of Moment Structures (IBM SPSS Amos) version 20 with a maximum likelihood function.

RESULTS

Malaysian stakeholders in the Klang Valley were found to be cautious of biobanks. Although they perceived the biobanks as moderately beneficial (mean score of 4.65) and were moderately willing to participate in biobanking (mean score of 4.10), they professed moderate concern about data and specimen protection issues (mean score of 4.33). Willingness to participate in biobanking was predominantly determined by four direct predictors: specific application-linked perceptions of their benefits (β = 0.35, p < 0.001), issues of data and specimen protection (β = - 0.31, p < 0.001) and religious acceptance (β = 0.15, p < 0.05) and trust in key players (β = 0.20, p < 0.001). The stakeholders' willingness to participate in biobanking also involves the intricate relationships between the above-mentioned factors and other predictors, such as attitudes regarding technology, religiosity and engagement.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study reaffirmed that stakeholders' willingness to participate in biobanking is a complex phenomenon that should be viewed from a multidimensional perspective. Stakeholder willingness to participate in biobanking is warranted when direct predictors (benefits, issues of data and specimen protection, religious acceptance, and trust in key players) as well as indirect factors are well accounted for.

Australia: regulating genomic data sharing to promote public trust

The regulation of genomic data sharing in Australia is a confusing mix of common law, legislation, ethical guidelines, and codes of practice. Beyond privacy laws, which only apply to genomic data that meets the definition of personal information, the key regulatory lever is the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) National Statement for Ethical Conduct in Human Research (“National Statement”) (2007). Compliance with the National Statement is a requirement for institutions to apply to the NHMRC for funding, and includes—among other things—requirements for review of most genomic research by Human Research Ethics Committees. The sections of the National Statement specifying requirements for research with human genomic data are currently under review, including proposed new requirements addressing the return of genetic research findings and oversight of transfer agreements. Ensuring the willingness of Australians to donate their genomic information and participate in medical research will require clarification and harmonisation of the applicable regulatory framework, along with reforms to ensure that these regulations reflect the conditions necessary to promote ongoing public trust in researchers and institutions.

Public trust and 'ethics review' as a commodity: the case of Genomics England Limited and the UK's 100,000 genomes project

The UK Chief Medical Officer's 2016 Annual Report, Generation Genome, focused on a vision to fully integrate genomics into all aspects of the UK's National Health Service (NHS). This process of integration, which has now already begun, raises a wide range of social and ethical concerns, many of which were discussed in the final Chapter of the report. This paper explores how the UK's 100,000 Genomes Project (100 kGP)-the catalyst for Generation Genome, and for bringing genomics into the NHS-is negotiating these ethical concerns. The UK's 100 kGP, promoted and delivered by Genomics England Limited (GEL), is an innovative venture aiming to sequence 100,000 genomes from NHS patients who have a rare disease, cancer, or an infectious disease. GEL has emphasised the importance of ethical governance and decision-making. However, some sociological critique argues that biomedical/technological organisations presenting themselves as 'ethical' entities do not necessarily reflect a space within which moral thinking occurs. Rather, the 'ethical work' conducted (and displayed) by organisations is more strategic, relating to the politics of the organisation and the need to build public confidence. We set out to explore whether GEL's ethical framework was reflective of this critique, and what this tells us more broadly about how genomics is being integrated into the NHS in response to the ethical and social concerns raised in Generation Genome. We do this by drawing on a series of 20 interviews with individuals associated with or working at GEL.

A qualitative study of adolescents' understanding of biobanks and their attitudes toward participation, re-contact, and data sharing

While biobanks have become more prevalent, little is known about adolescents' views of key governance issues. We conducted semi-structured interviews with adolescents between 15 and 17 years old to solicit their views. All interviews were audiotaped and transcribed. Two investigators coded the transcripts and resolved any discrepancies through consensus. We conducted 18 interviews before reaching data saturation. Four participants (22%) had previously heard of a biobank. Many participants had misunderstandings about biobanks, some of which persisted after education. Participants believed that enrolling in a biobank would benefit others through scientific research. Many study participants were unable to identify risks of biobank participation. Thirteen participants (72%) were willing to enroll in a biobank and only one (6%) initially was not. Participants believed that if they were unable to provide assent when enrolled, then they should be re-contacted at the age of majority and their data should not be shared until that time. Participants emphasized the importance of being aware of their enrollment and the possibility of disagreeing with their parents. Participants' misunderstanding of biobanks suggests that assent may not be adequately informed without additional education. While adolescents had positive attitudes toward biobanks, they emphasized the importance of awareness of and involvement in the decision to enroll.