Open sharing of genomic data: Who does it and why?

FedGMMAT: Federated generalized linear mixed model association tests

Increasing genetic and phenotypic data size is critical for understanding the genetic determinants of diseases. Evidently, establishing practical means for collaboration and data sharing among institutions is a fundamental methodological barrier for performing high-powered studies. As the sample sizes become more heterogeneous, complex statistical approaches, such as generalized linear mixed effects models, must be used to correct for the confounders that may bias results. On another front, due to the privacy concerns around Protected Health Information (PHI), genetic information is restrictively protected by sharing according to regulations such as Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). This limits data sharing among institutions and hampers efforts around executing high-powered collaborative studies. Federated approaches are promising to alleviate the issues around privacy and performance, since sensitive data never leaves the local sites. Motivated by these, we developed FedGMMAT, a federated genetic association testing tool that utilizes a federated statistical testing approach for efficient association tests that can correct for confounding fixed and additive polygenic random effects among different collaborating sites. Genetic data is never shared among collaborating sites, and the intermediate statistics are protected by encryption. Using simulated and real datasets, we demonstrate FedGMMAT can achieve the virtually same results as pooled analysis under a privacy-preserving framework with practical resource requirements.

The Landscape of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing in Reproductive Health Contexts: An Analytical Framework of Stakeholders and Their Competing Motivations

We propose a theoretical framework that identifies (a) the different categories of stakeholders and (b) the normative values that drive their attitudes toward direct-to-consumer genetic testing, with an emphasis on the reproductive health contexts. We conducted a literature search using varied combinations of search terms, including direct-to-consumer genetic testing, decision-making, reproductive health, and policy. Using a grounded theory approach to existing literature and in combination with a narrative review, we present a systematic framework of five categories of stakeholders (i.e., genome-driven stakeholders, industry-driven stakeholders, history-driven stakeholders, value-driven stakeholders, and social justice-driven stakeholders) that shape the public's discourse. Moving beyond the dialectical ethics that have governed the public discourse, we also identify the normative values and interests that motivate different stakeholders' attitudes and decision-making through theoretical sampling under the grounded theory. We investigate the competing and conflicting values within the same category of stakeholders. For example, despite being industry-driven stakeholders, medical professionals' attitudes are driven by concerns about standards of care; in contrast, health insurance companies' concerns are centered on profit. We further explore the tensions between these stakeholders that impact their strategic alliances and pose challenges to the practices of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Finally, we examine how these stakeholders and their corresponding values may shape future development and policies of direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the context of reproductive health.

Public attitudes towards genomic data sharing: results from a provincial online survey in Canada

BACKGROUND

While genomic data sharing can facilitate important health research and discovery benefits, these must be balanced against potential privacy risks and harms to individuals. Understanding public attitudes and perspectives on data sharing is important given these potential risks and to inform genomic research and policy that aligns with public preferences and needs.

METHODS

A cross sectional online survey measured attitudes towards genomic data sharing among members of the general public in an Eastern Canadian province.

RESULTS

Results showed a moderate comfort level with sharing genomic data, usually into restricted scientific databases with controlled access. Much lower comfort levels were observed for sharing data into open or publicly accessible databases. While respondents largely approved of sharing genomic data for health research permitted by a research ethics board, many general public members were concerned with who would have access to their data, with higher rates of approval for access from clinical or academic actors, but much more limited approval of access from commercial entities or governments. Prior knowledge about sequencing and about research ethics boards were both related to data sharing attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

With evolving regulations and guidelines for genomics research and data sharing, it is important to consider the perspectives of participants most impacted by these changes. Participant information materials and informed consent documents must be explicit about the safeguards in place to protect genomic data and the policies governing the sharing of data. Increased public awareness of the role of research ethics boards and of the need for genomic data sharing more broadly is also needed.

Parents' Perspectives on Secondary Genetic Ancestry Findings in Pediatric Genomic Medicine

PURPOSE

With advances in genome sequencing technologies, large-scale genome-wide sequencing has advanced our understanding of disease risk and etiology and contributes to the rapidly expanding genomic health services in pediatric settings. Because it is possible to return ancestry estimates following clinical genomic sequencing, it is important to understand the interest in ancestry results among families who may have the option of receiving these results.

METHODS

We conducted 26 semi-structured qualitative telephone interviews of parents with children/newborns with likely genetic conditions from two studies of clinical genome sequencing. Using a purposive sampling approach, we selected parents from the SouthSeq cohort, Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER Phase 2) project active in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, or an earlier Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER Phase 1) initiative based in the same region. Our interviews focused on parental knowledge about, attitudes on, interest in, and preferences for receiving genetic ancestry results following clinical genome sequencing in the neonatal intensive care unit or in pediatric clinics.

FINDINGS

Overall, parents prioritized clinical results or results that would help guide the diagnosis and treatment of their child, but they were also interested in any genetic result, including genetic ancestry, that potentially could enhance the meaning of information on disease risk, prevention and screening guidance, or family planning. While parents thought that ancestry results would help them learn about themselves and their heritage, the had concerns over the privacy, security, and accuracy of genetic ancestry information, although parents indicated that they had greater trust in ancestry findings provided as part of clinical care compared with those offered commercially. Parents also wanted ancestry results to be returned in a timely manner by knowledgeable staff, with kid-friendly materials and online tools available to aid, as needed, in the understanding of their results.

IMPLICATIONS

Taken together, our results highlight that despite being in high-stress situations, such as having a newborn in the neonatal intensive care unit, parents were interested in receiving genetic ancestry results along with their clinically relevant findings.

Implicit Incentives Among Reddit Users to Prioritize Attention Over Privacy and Reveal Their Faces When Discussing Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Test Results: Topic and Attention Analysis

Background

As direct-to-consumer genetic testing services have grown in popularity, the public has increasingly relied upon online forums to discuss and share their test results. Initially, users did so anonymously, but more recently, they have included face images when discussing their results. Various studies have shown that sharing images on social media tends to elicit more replies. However, users who do this forgo their privacy. When these images truthfully represent a user, they have the potential to disclose that user's identity.

Objective

This study investigates the face image sharing behavior of direct-to-consumer genetic testing users in an online environment to determine if there exists an association between face image sharing and the attention received from other users.

Methods

This study focused on r/23andme, a subreddit dedicated to discussing direct-to-consumer genetic testing results and their implications. We applied natural language processing to infer the themes associated with posts that included a face image. We applied a regression analysis to characterize the association between the attention that a post received, in terms of the number of comments, the karma score (defined as the number of upvotes minus the number of downvotes), and whether the post contained a face image.

Results

We collected over 15,000 posts from the r/23andme subreddit, published between 2012 and 2020. Face image posting began in late 2019 and grew rapidly, with over 800 individuals revealing their faces by early 2020. The topics in posts including a face were primarily about sharing, discussing ancestry composition, or sharing family reunion photos with relatives discovered via direct-to-consumer genetic testing. On average, posts including a face image received 60% (5/8) more comments and had karma scores 2.4 times higher than other posts.

Conclusions

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing consumers in the r/23andme subreddit are increasingly posting face images and testing reports on social platforms. The association between face image posting and a greater level of attention suggests that people are forgoing their privacy in exchange for attention from others. To mitigate this risk, platform organizers and moderators could inform users about the risk of posting face images in a direct, explicit manner to make it clear that their privacy may be compromised if personal images are shared.

Public opinion on sharing data from health services for clinical and research purposes without explicit consent: an anonymous online survey in the UK

OBJECTIVES

UK National Health Service/Health and Social Care (NHS/HSC) data are variably shared between healthcare organisations for direct care, and increasingly de-identified for research. Few large-scale studies have examined public opinion on sharing, including of mental health (MH) versus physical health (PH) data. We measured data sharing preferences.

DESIGN/SETTING/INTERVENTIONS/OUTCOMES

Pre-registered anonymous online survey, measuring expressed preferences, recruiting February to September 2020. Participants were randomised to one of three framing statements regarding MH versus PH data.

PARTICIPANTS

Open to all UK residents. Participants numbered 29 275; 40% had experienced an MH condition.

RESULTS

Most (76%) supported identifiable data sharing for direct clinical care without explicit consent, but 20% opposed this. Preference for clinical/identifiable sharing decreased with geographical distance and was slightly less for MH than PH data, with small framing effects. Preference for research/de-identified data sharing without explicit consent showed the same small PH/MH and framing effects, plus greater preference for sharing structured data than de-identified free text. There was net support for research sharing to the NHS, academic institutions, and national research charities, net ambivalence about sharing to profit-making companies researching treatments, and net opposition to sharing to other companies (similar to sharing publicly). De-identified linkage to non-health data was generally supported, except to data held by private companies. We report demographic influences on preference. A majority (89%) supported a single NHS mechanism to choose uses of their data. Support for data sharing increased during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Support for healthcare data sharing for direct care without explicit consent is broad but not universal. There is net support for the sharing of de-identified data for research to the NHS, academia, and the charitable sector, but not the commercial sector. A single national NHS-hosted system for patients to control the use of their NHS data for clinical purposes and for research would have broad support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN37444142.

Public opinion on sharing data from health services for clinical and research purposes without explicit consent: an anonymous online survey in the UK

OBJECTIVES

UK National Health Service/Health and Social Care (NHS/HSC) data are variably shared between healthcare organisations for direct care, and increasingly de-identified for research. Few large-scale studies have examined public opinion on sharing, including of mental health (MH) versus physical health (PH) data. We measured data sharing preferences.

DESIGN/SETTING/INTERVENTIONS/OUTCOMES

Pre-registered anonymous online survey, measuring expressed preferences, recruiting February to September 2020. Participants were randomised to one of three framing statements regarding MH versus PH data.

PARTICIPANTS

Open to all UK residents. Participants numbered 29 275; 40% had experienced an MH condition.

RESULTS

Most (76%) supported identifiable data sharing for direct clinical care without explicit consent, but 20% opposed this. Preference for clinical/identifiable sharing decreased with geographical distance and was slightly less for MH than PH data, with small framing effects. Preference for research/de-identified data sharing without explicit consent showed the same small PH/MH and framing effects, plus greater preference for sharing structured data than de-identified free text. There was net support for research sharing to the NHS, academic institutions, and national research charities, net ambivalence about sharing to profit-making companies researching treatments, and net opposition to sharing to other companies (similar to sharing publicly). De-identified linkage to non-health data was generally supported, except to data held by private companies. We report demographic influences on preference. A majority (89%) supported a single NHS mechanism to choose uses of their data. Support for data sharing increased during COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Support for healthcare data sharing for direct care without explicit consent is broad but not universal. There is net support for the sharing of de-identified data for research to the NHS, academia, and the charitable sector, but not the commercial sector. A single national NHS-hosted system for patients to control the use of their NHS data for clinical purposes and for research would have broad support.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN37444142.

Digital DNA lifecycle security and privacy: an overview

DNA sequencing technologies have advanced significantly in the last few years leading to advancements in biomedical research which has improved personalised medicine and the discovery of new treatments for diseases. Sequencing technology advancement has also reduced the cost of DNA sequencing, which has led to the rise of direct-to-consumer (DTC) sequencing, e.g. 23andme.com, ancestry.co.uk, etc. In the meantime, concerns have emerged over privacy and security in collecting, handling, analysing and sharing DNA and genomic data. DNA data are unique and can be used to identify individuals. Moreover, those data provide information on people's current disease status and disposition, e.g. mental health or susceptibility for developing cancer. DNA privacy violation does not only affect the owner but also affects their close consanguinity due to its hereditary nature. This article introduces and defines the term 'digital DNA life cycle' and presents an overview of privacy and security threats and their mitigation techniques for predigital DNA and throughout the digital DNA life cycle. It covers DNA sequencing hardware, software and DNA sequence pipeline in addition to common privacy attacks and their countermeasures when DNA digital data are stored, queried or shared. Likewise, the article examines DTC genomic sequencing privacy and security.

Controlling my genome with my smartphone: first clinical experiences of the PROMISE system

Background

The development of Precision Medicine strategies requires high-dimensional phenotypic and genomic data, both of which are highly privacy-sensitive data types. Conventional data management systems lack the capabilities to sufficiently handle the expected large quantities of such sensitive data in a secure manner. PROMISE is a genetic data management concept that implements a highly secure platform for data exchange while preserving patient interests, privacy, and autonomy.

Methods

The concept of PROMISE to democratize genetic data was developed by an interdisciplinary team. It integrates a sophisticated cryptographic concept that allows only the patient to grant selective access to defined parts of his genetic information with single DNA base-pair resolution cryptography. The PROMISE system was developed for research purposes to evaluate the concept in a pilot study with nineteen cardiomyopathy patients undergoing genotyping, questionnaires, and longitudinal follow-up.

Results

The safety of genetic data was very important to 79%, and patients generally regarded the data as highly sensitive. More than half the patients reported that their attitude towards the handling of genetic data has changed after using the PROMISE app for 4 months (median). The patients reported higher confidence in data security and willingness to share their data with commercial third parties, including pharmaceutical companies (increase from 5 to 32%).

Conclusion

PROMISE democratizes genomic data by a transparent, secure, and patient-centric approach. This clinical pilot study evaluating a genetic data infrastructure is unique and shows that patient’s acceptance of data sharing can be increased by patient-centric decision-making.

Graphic abstract

A Curriculum for Genomic Education of Molecular Genetic Pathology Fellows: A Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology Training and Education Committee

Molecular genetic pathology (MGP) is a subspecialty of pathology and medical genetics and genomics. Genomic testing, which we define as that which generates large data sets and interrogates large segments of the genome in a single assay, is increasingly recognized as essential for optimal patient care through precision medicine. The most common genomic testing technologies in clinical laboratories are next-generation sequencing and microarray. It is essential to train in these methods and to consider the data generated in the context of the diagnosis, medical history, and other clinical findings of individual patients. Accordingly, updating the MGP fellowship curriculum to include genomics is timely, important, and challenging. At the completion of training, an MGP fellow should be capable of independently interpreting and signing out results of a wide range of genomic assays and, given the appropriate context and institutional support, of developing and validating new assays in compliance with applicable regulations. The Genomics Task Force of the MGP Program Directors, a working group of the Association for Molecular Pathology Training and Education Committee, has developed a genomics curriculum framework and recommendations specific to the MGP fellowship. These recommendations are presented for consideration and implementation by MGP fellowship programs with the understanding that MGP programs exist in a diversity of clinical practice environments with a spectrum of available resources.

A survey of direct-to-consumer genotype data, and quality control tool (GenomePrep) for research

•

Review of the offerings from commercial genotyping companies.

•

Analysis of consumer genotype data SNP arrays.

•

Quality control analysis of over 7000 open genomes.

•

Open source tools and web service providing quality control report of genotype arrays.

Two major forces have contributed to the fast growth of human genetic data. One from medical research supported by governments and academic institutes; the other from direct-to-consumer (DTC) sequencing companies. While the former benefits from meticulously designed sequencing standards and quality control procedures, the latter comes in various formats and sequencing methods which are subject to changes over time and the particular needs of different companies. Thanks to the general public who shared their DNA data without constraint, here we provide a review for over 7000 genomes made public between 2011 and 2020, and produced by over six DTC sequencing companies. An open source tool-kit to systematically parse, quality check and filter genome files and statistically problematic alleles is provided to prepare consumer DNA datasets for research. The GenomePrep output is available in two common DNA datafile formats to enable further analysis with other tools. We also provide for download the combined output for all OpenSNP array genomes processed in this paper in a single data freeze file.

Before and after enforcement of GDPR: Personal data protection requests received by Croatian Personal Data Protection Agency from academic and research institutions

INTRODUCTION

The European Union's (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was put in force on 25th May 2018. It is not known how many personal data protection requests the national authority in Croatia had received before and after GDPR, and how many of those were related to research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We obtained data from the Croatian Personal Data Protection Agency (CPDPA) about requests/complaints related to personal data protection that were received specifically from academic/research institutions, specifically the number and type of all cases/requests between the years 2015-2019.

RESULTS

In 2018, CPDPA had a dramatic increase in the number of requests in the post-GDPR period, compared to the pre-GDPR period of the same year. In 2019, CPDPA received 2718 requests/complaints; less than in the year 2018. From 2015 to 2019, CPDPA received only 37 requests related to research.

CONCLUSIONS

Very few requests about personal data protection from academic and research institutions in Croatia were submitted to the national Croatian data protection authority. Future studies could explore whether researchers have sufficient awareness and knowledge about personal data protection related to research, to adequately implement the GDPR regulations.

What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption

Both sharing and using open research data have the revolutionary potentials for forwarding scientific advancement. Although previous research gives insight into researchers' drivers and inhibitors for sharing and using open research data, both these drivers and inhibitors have not yet been integrated via a thematic analysis and a theoretical argument is lacking. This study's purpose is to systematically review the literature on individual researchers' drivers and inhibitors for sharing and using open research data. This study systematically analyzed 32 open data studies (published between 2004 and 2019 inclusively) and elicited drivers plus inhibitors for both open research data sharing and use in eleven categories total that are: 'the researcher's background', 'requirements and formal obligations', 'personal drivers and intrinsic motivations', 'facilitating conditions', 'trust', 'expected performance', 'social influence and affiliation', 'effort', 'the researcher's experience and skills', 'legislation and regulation', and 'data characteristics.' This study extensively discusses these categories, along with argues how such categories and factors are connected using a thematic analysis. Also, this study discusses several opportunities for altogether applying, extending, using, and testing theories in open research data studies. With such discussions, an overview of identified categories and factors can be further applied to examine both researchers' drivers and inhibitors in different research disciplines, such as those with low rates of data sharing and use versus disciplines with high rates of data sharing plus use. What's more, this study serves as a first vital step towards developing effective incentives for both open data sharing and use behavior.

Just data? Solidarity and justice in data-driven medicine

This paper argues that data-driven medicine gives rise to a particular normative challenge. Against the backdrop of a distinction between the good and the right, harnessing personal health data towards the development and refinement of data-driven medicine is to be welcomed from the perspective of the good. Enacting solidarity drives progress in research and clinical practice. At the same time, such acts of sharing could-especially considering current developments in big data and artificial intelligence-compromise the right by leading to injustices and affecting concrete modes of individual self-determination. In order to address this potential tension, two key elements for ethical reflection on data-driven medicine are proposed: the controllability of information flows, including technical infrastructures that are conducive towards controllability, and a paradigm shift towards output-orientation in governance and policy.

Impacts of personal DNA ancestry testing

Consumer uptake of direct-to-consumer (DTC) DNA ancestry testing is accelerating, yet few empirical studies have examined test impacts on recipients despite the DTC ancestry industry being two decades old. Participants in a longitudinal cohort study of response to health-related DTC genomic testing also received personal DNA ancestry testing at no additional cost. Baseline survey data from the primary study were analyzed together with responses to an additional follow-up survey focused on the response to ancestry results. Ancestry results were generated for 3466 individuals. Of those, 1317 accessed their results, and 322 individuals completed an ancestry response survey, in other words, approximately one in ten who received ancestry testing responded to the survey. Self-reported race/ethnicity was predictive of those most likely to view their results. While 46% of survey responders (N = 147) reported their ancestry results as surprising or unexpected, less than 1% (N = 3) were distressed by them. Importantly, however, 21% (N = 67) reported that their results reshaped their personal identity. Most (81%; N = 260) planned to share results with family, and 12% (N = 39) intended to share results with a healthcare provider. Many (61%; N = 196) reported test benefits (e.g., health insights), while 12% (N = 38) reported negative aspects (e.g., lack of utility). Over half (N = 162) reported being more likely to have other genetic tests in the future. DNA ancestry testing affected individuals with respect to personal identity, intentions to share genetic information with family and healthcare providers, and the likelihood to engage with other genetic tests in the future. These findings have implications for medical care and research, specifically, provider readiness to engage with genetic ancestry information.

Integrating Rules for Genomic Research, Clinical Care, Public Health Screening and DTC Testing: Creating Translational Law for Translational Genomics

Human genomics is a translational field spanning research, clinical care, public health, and direct-to-consumer testing. However, law differs across these domains on issues including liability, consent, promoting quality of analysis and interpretation, and safeguarding privacy. Genomic activities crossing domains can thus encounter confusion and conflicts among these approaches. This paper suggests how to resolve these conflicts while protecting the rights and interests of individuals sequenced. Translational genomics requires this more translational approach to law.

"Hunting Down My Son's Killer": New Roles of Patients in Treatment Discovery and Ethical Uncertainty

The past few years have witnessed several media-covered cases involving citizens actively engaging in the pursuit of experimental treatments for their medical conditions-or those of their loved ones-in the absence of established standards of therapy. This phenomenon is particularly observable in patients with rare genetic diseases, as the development of effective therapies for these disorders is hindered by the limited profitability and market value of pharmaceutical research. Sociotechnical trends at the cross-section of medicine and society are facilitating the involvement of patients and creating the digital infrastructure necessary to its sustainment. Such participant-led research (PLR) has the potential to promote the autonomy of research participants as drivers of discovery and to open novel non-canonical avenues of scientific research. At the same time, however, the extra-institutional, self-appointed, and, often, oversight-free nature of PLR raises ethical concern. This paper explores the complex ethical entanglement of PLR by critically appraising case studies and discussing the conditions for its moral justification. Furthermore, we propose a path forward to ensure the safe and effective implementation of PLR within the current research ecosystem in a manner that maximizes the benefits for both individual participants and society at large, while minimizing the risks.

Enabling Posthumous Medical Data Donation: An Appeal for the Ethical Utilisation of Personal Health Data

This article argues that personal medical data should be made available for scientific research, by enabling and encouraging individuals to donate their medical records once deceased, similar to the way in which they can already donate organs or bodies. This research is part of a project on posthumous medical data donation developed by the Digital Ethics Lab at the Oxford Internet Institute at the University of Oxford. Ten arguments are provided to support the need to foster posthumous medical data donation. Two major risks are also identified-harm to others, and lack of control over the use of data-which could follow from unregulated donation of medical data. The argument that record-based medical research should proceed without the need to secure informed consent is rejected, and instead a voluntary and participatory approach to using personal medical data should be followed. The analysis concludes by stressing the need to develop an ethical code for data donation to minimise the risks, and offers five foundational principles for ethical medical data donation suggested as a draft code.

Opportunities and Challenges in Interpreting and Sharing Personal Genomes

The 2019 “Personal Genomes: Accessing, Sharing and Interpretation” conference (Hinxton, UK, 11–12 April 2019) brought together geneticists, bioinformaticians, clinicians and ethicists to promote openness and ethical sharing of personal genome data while protecting the privacy of individuals. The talks at the conference focused on two main topic areas: (1) Technologies and Applications, with emphasis on personal genomics in the context of healthcare. The issues discussed ranged from new technologies impacting and enabling the field, to the interpretation of personal genomes and their integration with other data types. There was particular emphasis and wide discussion on the use of polygenic risk scores to inform precision medicine. (2) Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications, with emphasis on genetic privacy: How to maintain it, how much privacy is possible, and how much privacy do people want? Talks covered the full range of genomic data visibility, from open access to tight control, and diverse aspects of balancing benefits and risks, data ownership, working with individuals and with populations, and promoting citizen science. Both topic areas were illustrated and informed by reports from a wide variety of ongoing projects, which highlighted the need to diversify global databases by increasing representation of understudied populations.

Third-Party Genetic Interpretation Tools: A Mixed-Methods Study of Consumer Motivation and Behavior

In an effort to meet ethical obligations and/or participant expectations, researchers may consider offering "raw" or uninterpreted genetic data for result return. It is therefore important to understand the motivations, behaviors, and perspectives of individuals who might choose to access raw data before such return becomes routine. In the direct-to-consumer (DTC) context, where raw data are often made available to customers, the use of third-party interpretation tools has raised concerns about genotype accuracy, data privacy, reliability of interpretation, and consumption of limited health care resources. However, relatively little is known about why individuals access raw data or what they do with the information received from third-party interpretation. Accordingly, we conducted a survey on raw data access and third-party tool usage among 1,137 DTC customers recruited through social media. Most survey respondents (89%) reported downloading their raw data. Among downloaders, 94% used at least one tool, most commonly Promethease (63%) or GEDmatch (84%). More than half (56%) used both health-related and non-health-related tools and differed significantly from those who used only one tool type in terms of demographics, participation in research, DTC tests ordered, and testing motivations. Exploratory interviews were conducted with 10 respondents and illustrated how social networking, initial lack of interesting findings, and general curiosity contributed to use of multiple tool types. These results suggest that even when initially motivated by ancestry and genealogy, consumers frequently also pursue health information in a largely unregulated and expanding suite of third-party tools, raising both challenges and opportunities for the professional genetics community.

Open Humans: A platform for participant-centered research and personal data exploration

BACKGROUND

Many aspects of our lives are now digitized and connected to the internet. As a result, individuals are now creating and collecting more personal data than ever before. This offers an unprecedented chance for human-participant research ranging from the social sciences to precision medicine. With this potential wealth of data comes practical problems (e.g., how to merge data streams from various sources), as well as ethical problems (e.g., how best to balance risks and benefits when enabling personal data sharing by individuals).

RESULTS

To begin to address these problems in real time, we present Open Humans, a community-based platform that enables personal data collections across data streams, giving individuals more personal data access and control of sharing authorizations, and enabling academic research as well as patient-led projects. We showcase data streams that Open Humans combines (e.g., personal genetic data, wearable activity monitors, GPS location records, and continuous glucose monitor data), along with use cases of how the data facilitate various projects.

CONCLUSIONS

Open Humans highlights how a community-centric ecosystem can be used to aggregate personal data from various sources, as well as how these data can be used by academic and citizen scientists through practical, iterative approaches to sharing that strive to balance considerations with participant autonomy, inclusion, and privacy.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing Data Privacy: Key Concerns and Recommendations Based on Consumer Perspectives

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) companies are engaging health consumers in unprecedented ways and leveraging the genetic information they collect to further engage health companies. This has produced controversy about DTC-GT consumer expectations, standards, and perceptions of privacy. In this commentary, we highlight recent events involving DTC-GT companies and controversy about privacy that followed those events and discuss recent studies that have explored DTC-GT consumer concerns about privacy. We discuss DTC-GT company standards of upholding consumer privacy and the general accessibility of DTC-GT company terms of use agreements and privacy policies that are written at reading levels above that of many consumers. We conclude that broader discussions and more research are needed to identify DTC-GT consumer concerns about and expectations of privacy. We anticipate that our recommendations will advance discussions on consumer privacy expectations and protections in an era of increasing engagement in DTC-GT.

Public Involvement in Global Genomics Research: A Scoping Review

Public involvement in research occurs when the public, patients, or research participants are actively contributing to the research process. Public involvement has been acknowledged as a key priority for prominent human genomics research initiatives in many different countries. However, to date, there has been no detailed analysis or review of the features, methods, and impacts of public involvement occurring in human genomics research projects worldwide. Here, we review the reported public involvement in 96 human genomics projects (initiatives), based on a database of initiatives hosted by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health, according to information reported on public domain websites. To conduct the scoping review, we applied a structured categorization of criteria to all information extracted from the search. We found that only a third of all initiatives reported public involvement in any capacity (32/96, 33%). In those reporting public involvement, we found considerable variation in both the methods and tasks of involvement. Some noteworthy initiatives reported diverse and comprehensive ways of involving the public, occurring through different stages of the research project cycle. Three notable initiatives reported a total of eight distinct impacts as a result of involving people. Our findings suggest there would be intrinsic value in having more public involvement occur in human genomics research worldwide. We also suggest that more systematic ways of reporting and evaluating involvement would be highly beneficial, to help develop best practices.

Much ado about nothing: A qualitative study of the experiences of an average-risk population receiving results of exome sequencing

The increasing availability of exome sequencing to the general ("healthy") population raises questions about the implications of genomic testing for individuals without suspected Mendelian diseases. Little is known about this population's motivations for undergoing exome sequencing, their expectations, reactions, and perceptions of utility. In order to address these questions, we conducted in-depth semi-structured interviews with 12 participants recruited from a longitudinal multi-omics profiling study that included exome sequencing. Participants were interviewed after receiving exome results, which included Mendelian disease-associated pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants, pharmacogenetic variants, and risk assessments for multifactorial diseases such as type 2 diabetes. The primary motivation driving participation in exome sequencing was personal curiosity. While they reported feeling validation and relief, participants were frequently underwhelmed by the results and described having expected more from exome sequencing. All participants reported discussing the results with at least some family, friends, and healthcare providers. Participants' recollection of the results returned to them was sometimes incorrect or incomplete, in many cases aligning with their perceptions of their health risks when entering the study. These results underscore the need for different genetic counseling approaches for generally healthy patients undergoing exome sequencing, in particular the need to provide anticipatory guidance to moderate participants' expectations. They also provide a preview of potential challenges clinicians may face as genomic sequencing continues to scale-up in the general population despite a lack of full understanding of its impact.

Public Views on Using Mobile Phone Call Detail Records in Health Research: Qualitative Study

Background

Mobile phone call detail records (CDRs) are increasingly being used in health research. The location element in CDRs is used in various health geographic studies, for example, to track population movement and infectious disease transmission. Vast volumes of CDRs are held by multinational organizations, which may make them available for research under various data governance regimes. However, there is an identified lack of public engagement on using CDRs for health research to contribute to an ethically founded framework.

Objective

This study aimed to explore public views on the use of call detail records in health research.

Methods

Views on using CDRs in health research were gained via a series of three public workshops (N=61) informed by a pilot workshop of 25 people. The workshops included an initial questionnaire to gauge participants’ prior views, discussion on health research using CDRs, and a final questionnaire to record workshop outcome views. The resulting data were analyzed for frequencies and emerging themes.

Results

At the outset, most participants (66%, 40/61) knew that location data were collected by operators, but only 3% (2/61) knew they were being used for health research. Initially, the majority of the participants (62%, 38/61) was content for their anonymous CDRs to be used, and this increased (80%, 49/61) after the discussion explained that safeguards were in place. Participants highlighted that terms and conditions should be clearer, as should information to phone users on data collection, privacy safeguards, sharing, and uses in research.

Conclusions

This is the first known study exploring public views of using mobile phone CDRs in health research. It revealed a lack of knowledge among the public on uses of CDRs and indicated that people are generally amenable to the use of anonymized data for research, but they want to be properly informed and safeguarded. We recommend that public views be incorporated into an ethically founded framework for the use of CDRs in health research to promote awareness and social acceptability in data use.

Genes wide open: Data sharing and the social gradient of genomic privacy

This study reports on 13 semistructured in-depth interviews to qualitatively explore the experiences of individuals who publicly shared their direct-to-consumer genetic testing results on the platform openSNP. In particular, we focused on interviewees' understanding of privacy. Participants reported that the likelihood and the magnitude of privacy harms depend on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, the stigma associated with certain clinical conditions, the existence of adequate legislation, and the nature of national health care systems. Some participants expressed the view that those who enjoy higher socioeconomic status or are better protected by their country's legislation have a responsibility to share their genetic data. Our study shows that people who share their genetic data publicly online-far from being insensitive to privacy risks-have a complex understanding of the social, relational, and contextual nature of genetic privacy.

User Perspectives of a Web-Based Data-Sharing Platform (Open Humans) on Ethical Oversight in Participant-Led Research: Protocol for a Quantitative Study

BACKGROUND

Advances in medicine rely to a great extent on people's willingness to share their data with researchers. With increasingly widespread use of digital technologies, several Web-based communities have emerged aiming to enable their users to share large amounts of data, some of which can possibly be employed for research purposes by scientists, or to conduct participant-led research (PLR). Scholarship has recently addressed the necessity of interrogating how existing ethical standards can and should be applied and adapted in view of the specificities of such Web-based activities. So far, no study has explored participants' beliefs about and attitudes toward ethical oversight when it comes to platforms that involve medical data sharing.

OBJECTIVE

This paper presents the protocol for a survey study aimed at understanding users' beliefs about Web-based data-sharing platforms regarding how research ethics principles should be applied in such a setting. Furthermore, the study aims at quantitatively assessing the relationship between participants' perspectives on ethical oversight and other variables such as previous participation in research, beliefs about data sharing, and attitudes toward self-experimentation.

METHODS

We are conducting a Web-based survey with users of a popular Web-based data-sharing platform, Open Humans. The survey has been sent to approximately 4640 users registered for the Open Humans newsletter. To fill out the survey, participants need to have an account on Open Humans. We expect a 5%-10% response rate (between 200 and 400 completed surveys out of approximately 4000 survey invitations sent). Independent variables include past data-sharing behavior and intention, beliefs about data sharing, past participation in research, attitudes toward self-experimentation, perceived knowledge of the platform's guidelines and terms, perceived importance of having transparent guidelines, and governance-related beliefs. The main dependent variable is participants' expectations regarding who should ensure that ethical requirements are met within research projects conducted on open data-sharing platforms, based on Emanuel et al's ethical framework. We will use chi-square tests to assess the relationship between participants' expectations regarding ethical oversight and their past behavior, future intentions, beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge.

RESULTS

Data collection started on June 13, 2018. A reminder to fill out the survey was sent to participants in mid-July. We expect to gain insights on users' perspectives on the ethical oversight of Web-based data-sharing platforms and on the associated experiences, beliefs, and sociodemographic characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

When digital tools allow people to engage in PLR including medical data, understanding how people interpret and envision the ethical oversight of their data-sharing practices is crucial. This will be the first study to explore users' perspectives on ethical oversight of Web-based data-sharing platforms. The results will help inform the development of a framework that can be employed for platforms hosting various kinds of research projects to accommodate participants' ethical oversight needs.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR1-10.2196/10939.

A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the United States

Concerns about genetic privacy affect individuals' willingness to accept genetic testing in clinical care and to participate in genomics research. To learn what is already known about these views, we conducted a systematic review, which ultimately analyzed 53 studies involving the perspectives of 47,974 participants on real or hypothetical privacy issues related to human genetic data. Bibliographic databases included MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, and Sociological Abstracts. Three investigators independently screened studies against predetermined criteria and assessed risk of bias. The picture of genetic privacy that emerges from this systematic literature review is complex and riddled with gaps. When asked specifically "are you worried about genetic privacy," the general public, patients, and professionals frequently said yes. In many cases, however, that question was posed poorly or only in the most general terms. While many participants expressed concern that genomic and medical information would be revealed to others, respondents frequently seemed to conflate privacy, confidentiality, control, and security. People varied widely in how much control they wanted over the use of data. They were more concerned about use by employers, insurers, and the government than they were about researchers and commercial entities. In addition, people are often willing to give up some privacy to obtain other goods. Importantly, little attention was paid to understanding the factors-sociocultural, relational, and media-that influence people's opinions and decisions. Future investigations should explore in greater depth which concerns about genetic privacy are most salient to people and the social forces and contexts that influence those perceptions. It is also critical to identify the social practices that will make the collection and use of these data more trustworthy for participants as well as to identify the circumstances that lead people to set aside worries and decide to participate in research.

Challenges and Potential Opportunities of Mobile Phone Call Detail Records in Health Research: Review

Background

Call detail records (CDRs) are collected by mobile network operators in the course of providing their service. CDRs are increasingly being used in research along with other forms of big data and represent an emerging data type with potential for public good. Many jurisdictions have infrastructures for health data research that could benefit from the integration of CDRs with health data.

Objective

The objective of this study was to review how CDRs have been used in health research and to identify challenges and potential opportunities for their wider use in conjunction with health data.

Methods

A literature review was conducted using structured search terms making use of major search engines. Initially, 4066 items were identified. Following screening, 46 full text articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. Information extracted included research topic area, population of study, datasets used, information governance and ethical considerations, study findings, and data limitations.

Results

The majority of published studies were focused on low-income and middle-income countries. Making use of the location element in CDRs, studies often modeled the transmission of infectious diseases or estimated population movement following natural disasters with a view to implementing interventions. CDRs were used in anonymized or aggregated form, and the process of gaining regulatory approvals varied with data provider and by jurisdiction. None included public views on the use of CDRs in health research.

Conclusions

Despite various challenges and limitations, anonymized mobile phone CDRs have been used successfully in health research. The use of aggregated data is a safeguard but also a further limitation. Greater opportunities could be gained if validated anonymized CDRs were integrated with routine health records at an individual level, provided that permissions and safeguards could be put in place. Further work is needed, including gaining public views, to develop an ethically founded framework for the use of CDRs in health research.

Omics research ethics considerations

BACKGROUND

Pending revisions to the Common Rule include topics consistent with respect for persons, justice, and beneficence for research subjects in studies using omics technologies and are relevant to omics research.

PURPOSE

Synthesize trends in bioethics, precision health, and omics nursing science for novice and experienced nursing scholars from which to consider bioethics questions.

METHODS

Review topics addressed in the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) strategic plan, Common Rule pending revisions, and publications regarding human subjects protection policies.

DISCUSSION

Omics research involves decisions regarding understandable informed consent, broad consent, data sharing, trust, equal benefit, equal access, societal variables, privacy, data security, and return of findings to participants.

CONCLUSION

Principles of respect for persons, justice, and beneficence as articulated in the Belmont report and reflected in the American Nurses Association (ANA) Code of Ethics provide guidance for human subjects protection procedures to advance omics and nursing science.

Multicenter data banking in management of dizzy patients: first results from the DizzyNet registry project

PURPOSE

Comprehensive phenotypical data across countries is needed to understand the determinants, prognosis and consequences of vestibular disease. The registry is a data repository for the members of the European DizzyNet. We report results from a pilot study using data from Turkey and Germany.

METHODS

The pilot study included a convenience sample of patients aged 18 or above referred to Ege University Medical School Hospital, Dokuz Eylül University Hospital, Izmir, Turkey, and the German Center for German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders, University on Munich, Germany, with symptoms of vertigo or dizziness. Health-related quality of life was assessed with the EQ5-D and the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI). To obtain comparable groups we matched data from the two countries for age, sex and diagnosis by propensity score.

RESULTS

We included 80 adult patients, 40 from each country (60% female, mean age 54.1, SD 12.4). Matching was successful. Vestibular migraine (34%) was the most frequent diagnosis, followed by benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (29%) and Menière's disease (12%). Clinical signs and symptoms were comparable in both countries. Patients from Turkey were more likely to report headaches (65 vs. 32%) and to show gait unsteadiness (51 vs. 5%). Patients from Germany reported significantly higher quality of life and lower values of the DHI score.

CONCLUSIONS

Sharing data facilitates research, enhances translation from basic science into clinical applications, and increases transparency. The DizzyNet registry is a first step to data sharing in vestibular research across Europe.

APPLaUD: access for patients and participants to individual level uninterpreted genomic data

BACKGROUND

There is a growing support for the stance that patients and research participants should have better and easier access to their raw (uninterpreted) genomic sequence data in both clinical and research contexts.

MAIN BODY

We review legal frameworks and literature on the benefits, risks, and practical barriers of providing individuals access to their data. We also survey genomic sequencing initiatives that provide or plan to provide individual access. Many patients and research participants expect to be able to access their health and genomic data. Individuals have a legal right to access their genomic data in some countries and contexts. Moreover, increasing numbers of participatory research projects, direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies, and now major national sequencing initiatives grant individuals access to their genomic sequence data upon request.

CONCLUSION

Drawing on current practice and regulatory analysis, we outline legal, ethical, and practical guidance for genomic sequencing initiatives seeking to offer interested patients and participants access to their raw genomic data.

Attitudes towards Personal Genomics and Sharing of Genetic Data among Older Swiss Adults: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the willingness of older Swiss adults to share genetic data for research purposes and to investigate factors that might impact their willingness to share data.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 40 participants (19 male and 21 female) aged between 67 and 92 years, between December 2013 and April 2014 attending the Seniorenuniversität Zürich, Switzerland. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. For the analysis of the interviews, an initial coding scheme was developed, refined over time, and applied afterwards to all interviews.

RESULTS

The majority of participants were in favor of placing genetic data to research's disposal. Participant's motivations to share data were mainly driven by altruistic reasons and by contributing to the greater good. Furthermore, several factors which might impact the willingness to share data such as sharing data with private companies, generational differences, differences between sharing genetic data or health data, and sharing due to financial incentives were highlighted. Last, some participants indicated concerns regarding data sharing such as misuse of data, the fear of becoming a transparent citizen, and data safety. However, 20% of the participants express confidence in data protection. Even participants who were skeptical in the beginning of the interviews admitted the benefits of data sharing.

DISCUSSION

Overall, this study suggests older citizens are willing to share their data for research purposes. However, most of them will only contribute if their data is appropriately protected and if they trust the research institution to use the shared data responsibly. More transparency and detailed information regarding the data usage are urgently needed. There is a great need to increase the engagement of older adults in research since they present a large segment of our society - one which is often underexamined in research.

CONCLUSION

Increased focus on general public engagement, especially of older adults, in scientific research activities known as "citizen science" is needed to further strengthen the uptake of personalized medicine.

Biomedical Big Data: New Models of Control Over Access, Use and Governance

Empirical evidence suggests that while people hold the capacity to control their data in high regard, they increasingly experience a loss of control over their data in the online world. The capacity to exert control over the generation and flow of personal information is a fundamental premise to important values such as autonomy, privacy, and trust. In healthcare and clinical research this capacity is generally achieved indirectly, by agreeing to specific conditions of informational exposure. Such conditions can be openly stated in informed consent documents or be implicit in the norms of confidentiality that govern the relationships of patients and healthcare professionals. However, with medicine becoming a data-intense enterprise, informed consent and medical confidentiality, as mechanisms of control, are put under pressure. In this paper we explore emerging models of informational control in data-intense healthcare and clinical research, which can compensate for the limitations of currently available instruments. More specifically, we discuss three approaches that hold promise in increasing individual control: the emergence of data portability rights as means to control data access, new mechanisms of informed consent as tools to control data use, and finally, new participatory governance schemes that allow individuals to control their data through direct involvement in data governance. We conclude by suggesting that, despite the impression that biomedical big data diminish individual control, the synergistic effect of new data management models can in fact improve it.

Raw Genomic Data: Storage, Access, and Sharing

Patients are increasingly being encouraged and supported to access and control their own medical and genomic data. We argue that well-established and transparent raw genomic data retention and returning policies are imperative to enable patients to practice their rights to access and control raw data.

Considering the Benefits and Risks of Research Participants' Access to Sequence Data

The use of sequencing technologies has greatly expanded in both research and clinical settings. The generation of voluminous datasets has raised several issues regarding data sharing and access. Current regulations require clinical laboratories and some research laboratories to provide access to test data, including sequencing data, directly to patients upon request. There is some controversy over whether this access right may be somewhat broader, encompassing research data as well-a question beyond the scope of this article. It is clear that in the research setting, deposition of sequencing data into public or private databases often occurs, although little information exists about the return of data files to research participants (in contrast to the extensive deliberations regarding return of results). Thus, further consideration of the issue of access to data files is warranted as well as more effort to understand both patients' and research participants' use of the data.