The distinction between IFs and IRRs thus serves a useful purpose in promoting analysis of different types of findings. Table 1 systematizes how IFs and IRRs can arise in primary research or at the collection site, at the biobank, and in secondary research using biobank data and samples. This paper maintains the distinction between IFs and IRRs, but recommends that biobanks, researchers, IRBs, and policy makers consider in each research context whether they can be distinguished and what the relationship between return of IFs and IRRs should be, striving for a harmonized approach, especially when individual contributors may not readily perceive a distinction between these two types of findings. Differences in the handling of IFs and IRRs should be carefully explained.
