1
|
Meitern M, Hansson S. Persuasive Appeals in Genetic Biobank Recruitment Campaigns: Social and Ethical Implications. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2023; 18:284-295. [PMID: 37337739 PMCID: PMC10496419 DOI: 10.1177/15562646231181028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Revised: 05/09/2023] [Accepted: 05/18/2023] [Indexed: 06/21/2023]
Abstract
The social and ethical implications of large-scale biobank donor recruitment campaigns have remained understudied. We use two recent campaigns of the population-based genetic biobank in Estonia as an example to demonstrate how campaign spokespersons try to persuade potential donors by appealing to (1) gaining self-knowledge, (2) gaining control over one's health, (3) fear of illness, (4) contributing to healthcare, (5) contributing to science, and (6) contributing to one's country. While these campaigns succeeded in recruiting 15 percent of the country's adult population as donors, we explain how the use of some of these appeals may (a) create unrealistic expectations regarding the benefits donors could receive and (b) conceal the risks regarding health data. The study lays a necessary groundwork for future empirical research on the ethics of biobank recruitment campaigns.
Collapse
|
2
|
Mascalzoni D, Melotti R, Pattaro C, Pramstaller PP, Gögele M, De Grandi A, Biasiotto R. Ten years of dynamic consent in the CHRIS study: informed consent as a dynamic process. Eur J Hum Genet 2022; 30:1391-1397. [PMID: 36064788 PMCID: PMC9441838 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01160-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/14/2022] [Revised: 06/13/2022] [Accepted: 07/14/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The Cooperative Health Research in South Tyrol (CHRIS) is a longitudinal study in Northern Italy, using dynamic consent since its inception in 2011. The CHRIS study collects health data and biosamples for research, and foresees regular follow-ups over time. We describe the experience with the CHRIS study dynamic consent, providing an overview of its conceptualization and implementation, and of the participant-centered strategies used to assess and improve the process, directly linked to participation and communication. In order to comply with high ethical standards and to allow broadness in the areas of research, CHRIS dynamic consent was conceived as an interactive process: based on a strong governance and an ongoing tailored communication with participants, it aims to promote autonomy and to develop a trust-based engaged relationship with participants, also relevant for retention. Built within an online platform, the consent allows granular choices, which can be changed over time. In a process of co-production, participants views have been investigated and kept into account in policy development. Participants showed a high degree of participation, thus enabling the consolidation of the CHRIS resources. Even though a low change rate was reported in the baseline, participants valued the possibility of changing their informed consent choices. Communication (language-tailored, ongoing, multimedia) was important for participants, and for participation and retention. In our experience, dynamic consent was proven to be a flexible consent model, which allowed to meet ethical and legal standards for participation in research, and to accommodate participants' and researchers' needs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah Mascalzoni
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy ,grid.8993.b0000 0004 1936 9457Center for Research Ethics and Bioethics, Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
| | - Roberto Melotti
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Cristian Pattaro
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Peter Paul Pramstaller
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Martin Gögele
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Alessandro De Grandi
- grid.511439.bInstitute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy
| | - Roberta Biasiotto
- Institute for Biomedicine, Eurac Research, Affiliated Institute of the University of Lübeck, Bolzano, Italy. .,Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Samuel G, Hardcastle F, Broekstra R, Lucassen A. Exploring how biobanks communicate the possibility of commercial access and its associated benefits and risks in participant documents. BMC Med Ethics 2022; 23:95. [PMID: 36131283 PMCID: PMC9491663 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-022-00829-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Biobanks and biomedical research data repositories collect their samples and associated data from volunteer participants. Their aims are to facilitate biomedical research and improve health, and they are framed in terms of contributing to the public good. Biobank resources may be accessible to researchers with commercial motivations, for example, researchers in pharmaceutical companies who may utilise the data to develop new clinical therapeutics and pharmaceutical drugs. Studies exploring citizen perceptions of public/private interactions associated with large health data repositories/biobanks indicate that there are sensitivities around public/private and/or non-profit/profit relationships and international sample and data sharing. Less work has explored how biobanks communicate their public/private partnerships to the public or to their potential research participants.
Methods We explored how a biobank’s aims, benefits and risks, and private/public relationships have been framed in public facing recruitment documents (consent forms and participant information sheets). Results Biobank documents often communicate their commercial access arrangements but not the detail about what these interactions would entail, and how risks and benefits would be distributed to the public. Conclusion We argue that this leads to a polarised discourse between public and private entities and/or activities, and fails to attend to the blurred lines between them. This results in a lack of attention to more important issues such as how risks and benefits in general are distributed to the public. We call for a nuanced approach that can contribute to the much-needed dialogue in this space.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Samuel
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Centre for Personalised Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7BN, UK. .,Clinical Ethics, Law and Society Research group, Faculty of Medicine, and Southampton NIHR Biomedical Research Centre., University of Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.
| | - F Hardcastle
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Centre for Personalised Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7BN, UK
| | - R Broekstra
- Clinical Ethics, Law and Society Research group, Faculty of Medicine, and Southampton NIHR Biomedical Research Centre., University of Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK.,Department of Health Sciences, Section Health Psychology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen of Groningen, Antonius Deusinglaan 1, 9713 AV, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - A Lucassen
- Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics and Centre for Personalised Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7BN, UK.,Clinical Ethics, Law and Society Research group, Faculty of Medicine, and Southampton NIHR Biomedical Research Centre., University of Southampton, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO16 6YD, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Platt JE, Solomonides AE, Walker PD, Amara PS, Richardson JE, Middleton B. A survey of computable biomedical knowledge repositories. Learn Health Syst 2022; 7:e10314. [PMID: 36654807 PMCID: PMC9835044 DOI: 10.1002/lrh2.10314] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/29/2021] [Revised: 03/11/2022] [Accepted: 04/29/2022] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction While data repositories are well-established in clinical and research enterprises, knowledge repositories with shareable computable biomedical knowledge (CBK) are relatively new entities to the digital health ecosystem. Trustworthy knowledge repositories are necessary for learning health systems, but the policies, standards, and practices to promote trustworthy CBK artifacts and methods to share, and safely and effectively use them are not well studied. Methods We conducted an online survey of 24 organizations in the United States known to be involved in the development or deployment of CBK. The aim of the survey was to assess the current policies and practices governing these repositories and to identify best practices. Descriptive statistics methods were applied to data from 13 responding organizations, to identify common practices and policies instantiating the TRUST principles of Transparency, Responsibility, User Focus, Sustainability, and Technology. Results All 13 respondents indicated to different degrees adherence to policies that convey TRUST. Transparency is conveyed by having policies pertaining to provenance, credentialed contributors, and provision of metadata. Repositories provide knowledge in machine-readable formats, include implementation guidelines, and adhere to standards to convey Responsibility. Repositories report having Technology functions that enable end-users to verify, search, and filter for knowledge products. Less common TRUST practices are User Focused procedures that enable consumers to know about user licensing requirements or query the use of knowledge artifacts. Related to Sustainability, less than a majority post describe their sustainability plans. Few organizations publicly describe whether patients play any role in their decision-making. Conclusion It is essential that knowledge repositories identify and apply a baseline set of criteria to lay a robust foundation for their trustworthiness leading to optimum uptake, and safe, reliable, and effective use to promote sharing of CBK. Identifying current practices suggests a set of desiderata for the CBK ecosystem in its continued evolution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jodyn E. Platt
- University of Michigan Medical SchoolDepartment of Learning Health SciencesAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | | | - Philip D. Walker
- Annette and Irwin Eskind Family Biomedical Library and Learning CenterVanderbilt UniversityNashvilleTennesseeUSA
| | - Philip S. Amara
- University of Michigan Medical SchoolDepartment of Learning Health SciencesAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Joshua E. Richardson
- Center for Health Informatics and Evidence Synthesis RTI InternationalChicagoIllinoisUSA
| | - Blackford Middleton
- Mobilizing Computable Biomedical Kinowledge Steering CommitteeAustinTexasUSA
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Simon CM, Wang K, Shinkunas LA, Stein DT, Meissner P, Smith M, Pentz R, Klein DW. Communicating With Diverse Patients About Participating in a Biobank: A Randomized Multisite Study Comparing Electronic and Face-to-Face Informed Consent Processes. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2022; 17:144-166. [PMID: 34410195 PMCID: PMC8712348 DOI: 10.1177/15562646211038819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Some individuals' understanding of informed consent (IC) information may improve with electronic delivery, but others may benefit from face-to-face (F2F). This randomized, multisite study explores how individuals from diverse backgrounds understand electronic IC documents versus F2F, their confidence in understanding, and enrollment in research. A total of 501 patients at two U.S. biobanks with diverse populations participated. There were no overall differences between electronic and F2F understanding, but F2F predicted higher confidence in understanding and enrollment. Ethnicity and a higher educational level predicted higher understanding and confidence. Study findings suggest that electronic consent may lead to better understanding for non-Hispanic patients of higher socioeconomic status. F2F processes may lead to better understanding and higher enrollment of patients from Hispanic and lower socioeconomic levels. Researchers should carefully consider how they implement electronic IC processes and whether to maintain an F2F process to better address the needs and limitations of some populations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Kai Wang
- University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
| | | | | | | | | | - Rebecca Pentz
- School of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Motives for withdrawal of participation in biobanking and participants' willingness to allow linkages of their data. Eur J Hum Genet 2021; 30:367-377. [PMID: 34803164 PMCID: PMC8904772 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-021-00997-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2020] [Revised: 10/12/2021] [Accepted: 10/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
Kasperbauer TJ, Halverson C, Garcia A, Schwartz PH. Biobank Participants' Attitudes Toward Data Sharing and Privacy: The Role of Trust in Reducing Perceived Risks. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2021; 17:167-176. [PMID: 34779299 DOI: 10.1177/15562646211055282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Biobank participants are often unaware of possible uses of their genetic and health information, despite explicit descriptions of those uses in consent forms. To explore why this misunderstanding persists, we conducted semi-structured interviews and knowledge tests with 22 participants who had recently enrolled in a research biobank. Results indicated that participants lacked understanding of privacy and data-sharing topics but were mostly unconcerned about associated risks. Participants described their answers on the knowledge test as largely driven by their trust in the healthcare system, not by a close reading of the information presented to them. This finding may help explain the difficulties in increasing participant understanding of privacy-related topics, even when such information is clearly presented in biobank consent forms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T J Kasperbauer
- Indiana University Center for Bioethics, 12250Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Colin Halverson
- Indiana University Center for Bioethics, 12250Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Abby Garcia
- Indiana University Center for Bioethics, 12250Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA
| | - Peter H Schwartz
- Indiana University Center for Bioethics, 12250Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.,Department of Philosophy, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), Indianapolis, IN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Broekstra R, Aris-Meijer J, Maeckelberghe E, Stolk R, Otten S. Demographic and prosocial intrapersonal characteristics of biobank participants and refusers: the findings of a survey in the Netherlands. Eur J Hum Genet 2021; 29:11-19. [PMID: 32737438 PMCID: PMC7852517 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-020-0701-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/23/2019] [Revised: 06/03/2020] [Accepted: 07/07/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reinder Broekstra
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
- Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Judith Aris-Meijer
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Els Maeckelberghe
- Wenckebach Institute for Medical Education and Training, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald Stolk
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Sabine Otten
- Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Ursin L, Ytterhus B, Christensen E, Skolbekken JA. «If you give them your little finger, they'll tear off your entire arm»: losing trust in biobank research. MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2020; 23:565-576. [PMID: 32734531 PMCID: PMC7538395 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-020-09969-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/05/2023]
Abstract
Why do some people withdraw from biobank studies? To our knowledge, very few studies have been done on the reflections of biobank ex-participants. In this article, we report from such a study. 16 years ago, we did focus group interviews with biobank participants and ex-participants. We found that the two groups interestingly shared worries concerning the risks involved in possible novel uses of their biobank material, even though they drew opposite conclusions from their worries. Revisiting these interviews today reveals a remarkable relevance to present concerns, since the possible developments that worried ex-participants and participants 16 years ago now are becoming realities. Drawing on conceptual distinctions by sociologist and philosopher Niklas Luhmann, we argue that while ex-participants express a loss of trust in the biobank institution to manage the use of their biobank material in a legitimate way, remaining participants expressed confidence in the management of the biobank institution to secure their interests. This analysis brings out important aspects of emerging trends in biobank research participation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lars Ursin
- Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, NTNU, 7491, Trondheim, Norway.
| | - Borgunn Ytterhus
- Department of Public Health and Nursing, NTNU, 7491, Trondheim, Norway
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Broekstra R, Maeckelberghe ELM, Aris-Meijer JL, Stolk RP, Otten S. Motives of contributing personal data for health research: (non-)participation in a Dutch biobank. BMC Med Ethics 2020; 21:62. [PMID: 32711531 PMCID: PMC7382031 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-020-00504-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2019] [Accepted: 07/14/2020] [Indexed: 01/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Large-scale, centralized data repositories are playing a critical and unprecedented role in fostering innovative health research, leading to new opportunities as well as dilemmas for the medical sciences. Uncovering the reasons as to why citizens do or do not contribute to such repositories, for example, to population-based biobanks, is therefore crucial. We investigated and compared the views of existing participants and non-participants on contributing to large-scale, centralized health research data repositories with those of ex-participants regarding the decision to end their participation. This comparison could yield new insights into motives of participation and non-participation, in particular the behavioural change of withdrawal. Methods We conducted 36 in-depth interviews with ex-participants, participants, and non-participants of a three-generation, population-based biobank in the Netherlands. The interviews focused on the respondents’ decision-making processes relating to their participation in a large-scale, centralized repository for health research data. Results The decision of participants and non-participants to contribute to the biobank was motivated by a desire to help others. Whereas participants perceived only benefits relating to their participation and were unconcerned about potential risks, non-participants and ex-participants raised concerns about the threat of large-scale, centralized public data repositories and public institutes, such as social exclusion or commercialization. Our analysis of ex-participants’ perceptions suggests that intrapersonal characteristics, such as levels of trust in society, participation conceived as a social norm, and basic societal values account for differences between participants and non-participants. Conclusions Our findings indicate the fluidity of motives centring on helping others in decisions to participate in large-scale, centralized health research data repositories. Efforts to improve participation should focus on enhancing the trustworthiness of such data repositories and developing layered strategies for communication with participants and with the public. Accordingly, personalized approaches for recruiting participants and transmitting information along with appropriate regulatory frameworks are required, which have important implications for current data management and informed consent procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R Broekstra
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, FA 40, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands. .,Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - E L M Maeckelberghe
- University Medical Center Groningen, Institute for Medical Education, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J L Aris-Meijer
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, FA 40, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - R P Stolk
- Department of Epidemiology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, FA 40, 9700, RB, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - S Otten
- Department of Social Psychology, Faculty of Behavioral and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|