To share or not to share: a randomized trial of consent for data sharing in genome research.
paper
Cited
Public
- Authors
- McGuire, Amy L; Oliver, Jill M; Slashinski, Melody J; Graves, Jennifer L; Wang, Tao; Kelly, P Adam; Fisher, William; Lau, Ching C; Goss, John; Okcu, Mehmet; Treadwell-Deering, Diane; Goldman, Alica M; Noebels, Jeffrey L; Hilsenbeck, Susan G
- Year
- 2011
- Journal
- Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics
- PMID
- 21785360
- DOI
- 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182227589
- PMCID
- PMC3203320
PURPOSE: Despite growing concerns toward maintaining participants' privacy, individual investigators collecting tissue and other biological specimens for genomic analysis are encouraged to obtain informed consent for broad data sharing. Our purpose was to assess the effect on research enrollment and data sharing decisions of three different consent types (traditional, binary, or tiered) with varying levels of control and choices regarding data sharing. METHODS: A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted with 323 eligible adult participants being recruited into one of six genome studies at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, between January 2008 and August 2009. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three experimental consent documents (traditional, n = 110; binary, n = 103; and tiered, n = 110). Debriefing in follow-up visits provided participants a detailed review of all consent types and the chance to change data sharing choices or decline genome study participation. RESULTS: Before debriefing, 83.9% of participants chose public data release. After debriefing, 53.1% chose public data release, 33.1% chose restricted (controlled access database) release, and 13.7% opted out of data sharing. Only one participant declined genome study participation due to data sharing concerns. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that most participants are willing to publicly release their genomic data; however, a significant portion prefers restricted release. These results suggest discordance between existing data sharing policies and participants' judgments and desires.
Study Consort Diagram
← Prev
21–30 of 30
No entities extracted from this document yet.
No uploaded files.
Not in any collection.
In this knowledge base
| Title | Year | PMID |
|---|---|---|
| Review: Genetic research on alcohol use outcomes in African American populations: A review of the literature, associated challenges, and implications. | 2017 | 28240821 |
External
| Title | Authors | Journal | Year | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Autism data sharing: Benefits, challenges, and recommendations. | Lautarescu A et al. | — | 2026 | → |
| How do we measure data sharing in the biomedical sciences? A measurement systematic review of biomedical data sharing-related knowledge, attitudes and practices across stakeholder groups, data types and geographies. | Maxwell L et al. | — | 2026 | → |
| The Genetic Data Market: Institutional Governance of Academic/Industry Research Partnerships for the Public Good. | Spector-Bagdady K | — | 2025 | → |
| An Ethical Approach to Genomic Privacy Preserving Technology Development. | Gerido LH et al. | — | 2024 | → |
| Barriers impeding research data sharing on chronic disease prevention among the older adults in low-and middle-income countries: a systematic review. | Mosha NFV et al. | — | 2024 | → |
| Comparing Attitudes About Genomic Privacy and Data Sharing in Adolescents and Parents of Children Enrolled in a Genomic Research Repository. | Berrios C et al. | — | 2024 | → |
| Patient and Public Willingness to Share Personal Health Data for Third-Party or Secondary Uses: Systematic Review. | Baines R et al. | — | 2024 | → |
| Whole genome sequencing in (recurrent) glioblastoma: challenges related to informed consent procedures and data sharing. | Hasner MC et al. | — | 2024 | → |
| Biobanking and consenting to research: a qualitative thematic analysis of young people's perspectives in the North East of England. | van der Velden FJS et al. | — | 2023 | → |
| COVID-19 trials were not more likely to report intent to share individual data than non-COVID-19 trials in ClinicalTrials.gov. | Ramdjee B et al. | — | 2023 | → |
| Open Science in Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine: A Statement From the Behavioral Medicine Research Council. | Segerstrom SC et al. | — | 2023 | → |
| Public attitudes towards genomic data sharing: results from a provincial online survey in Canada. | Etchegary H et al. | — | 2023 | → |
| A patient-driven clinicogenomic partnership for metastatic prostate cancer. | Crowdis J et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| Mining the Data: Exploring Rural Patients' Attitudes about the Use of Their Personal Information in Research. | McCormick JB et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| National Institutes of Mental Health Data Archive: Privacy, Consent, and Diversity Considerations and Options for Improvement. | Lee SM et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| Public interest in unexpected genomic findings: a survey study identifying aspects of sequencing attitudes that influence preferences. | Etchegary H et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| The difficulties of broad data sharing in genomic medicine: Empirical evidence from diverse participants in prenatal and pediatric clinical genomics research. | Norstad M et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| When Not to Ask: A Defense of Choice-Masking Nudges in Medical Research. | McGrew S et al. | — | 2022 | → |
| A policy Delphi study to validate the key implications of data sharing (KIDS) framework for pediatric genomics in Canada. | Rahimzadeh V et al. | — | 2021 | → |
| Identifying Aspects of Public Attitudes Toward Whole Genome Sequencing to Inform the Integration of Genomics into Care. | Etchegary H et al. | — | 2021 | → |
| Using game theory to thwart multistage privacy intrusions when sharing data. | Wan Z et al. | — | 2021 | → |
| Are Public Repository Requirements Exacerbating Lack of Diversity? | May T | — | 2020 | → |
| Big Data Privacy in Biomedical Research. | Wang S et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| Ethical issues in global neuroimaging genetics collaborations. | Palk A et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues Related to the Inclusion of Individuals With Intellectual Disabilities in Electronic Health Record Research: Scoping Review. | Raspa M et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| Perceived Risks, Benefits, and Interest in Participating in Environmental Health Studies That Share Personal Exposure Data: A U.S. Survey of Prospective Participants. | Udesky JO et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| Privacy challenges and research opportunities for genomic data sharing. | Bonomi L et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| "Who is watching the watchdog?": ethical perspectives of sharing health-related data for precision medicine in Singapore. | Lysaght T et al. | — | 2020 | → |
| A novel metadata management model to capture consent for record linkage in longitudinal research studies. | McMahon C et al. | — | 2019 | → |
| Consent insufficient for data release. | Nicol D et al. | — | 2019 | → |
| Motivations for data sharing-views of research participants from four European countries: A DIRECT study. | Shah N et al. | — | 2019 | → |
| Sexual and gender minority youth's perspectives on sharing de-identified data in sexual health and HIV prevention research. | Matson M et al. | — | 2019 | → |
| User-focused data sharing agreements: a foundation for the genomic future. | Petersen C | — | 2019 | → |
| A systematic literature review of individuals' perspectives on privacy and genetic information in the United States. | Clayton EW et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| Australia: regulating genomic data sharing to promote public trust. | Eckstein L et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| Genomics, Big Data, and Broad Consent: a New Ethics Frontier for Prevention Science. | Fisher CB et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| Public attitudes in Japan toward participation in whole genome sequencing studies. | Okita T et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials. | Treweek S et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| The development of large-scale de-identified biomedical databases in the age of genomics-principles and challenges. | Dankar FK et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| The research participant perspective related to the conduct of genomic cohort studies: A systematic review of the quantitative literature. | Goodman D et al. | — | 2018 | → |
| A qualitative study of participants' views on re-consent in a longitudinal biobank. | Dixon-Woods M et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| Creating a data resource: what will it take to build a medical information commons? | Deverka PA et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| De-identified genomic data sharing: the research participant perspective. | Goodman D et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| Engaging a state: Facebook comments on a large population biobank. | Platt T et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| iCONCUR: informed consent for clinical data and bio-sample use for research. | Kim H et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| Review: Genetic research on alcohol use outcomes in African American populations: A review of the literature, associated challenges, and implications. | Dick DM et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| Sharing individual patient and parasite-level data through the WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network platform: A qualitative case study | Pisani E et al. | — | 2017 | — |
| Sharing individual patient and parasite-level data through the WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network platform: A qualitative case study. | Pisani E et al. | — | 2017 | → |
| Facilitating a culture of responsible and effective sharing of cancer genome data. | Siu LL et al. | — | 2016 | → |
| Parental perspectives on consent for participation in large-scale, non-biological data repositories. | Manhas KP et al. | — | 2016 | → |
| Developing Ethical Practices for Public Health Research Data Sharing in South Africa: The Views and Experiences From a Diverse Sample of Research Stakeholders. | Denny SG et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| Privacy in the Genomic Era. | Naveed M et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| Research participants' perceptions and views on consent for biobank research: a review of empirical data and ethical analysis. | D'Abramo F et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| Seeking consent from those who cannot answer: new light on emergency research conducted under the exception from informed consent. | Burns J | — | 2015 | → |
| Stakeholders' perspectives on biobank-based genomic research: systematic review of the literature. | Husedzinovic A et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| Streamlining review of research involving humans: Canadian models. | Zawati MH et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| The impact of commercialisation and genetic data sharing arrangements on public trust and the intention to participate in biobank research. | Critchley C et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| The translational potential of research on the ethical, legal, and social implications of genomics. | Burke W et al. | — | 2015 | → |
| Attitudes of research participants and the general public towards genomic data sharing: a systematic literature review. | Shabani M et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Consenting for current genetic research: is Canadian practice adequate? | Jaitovich Groisman I et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Genomic data-sharing: what will be our legacy? | Callier S et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Informed consent for human genetic and genomic studies: a systematic review. | Khan A et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Obtaining informed consent for clinical tumor and germline exome sequencing of newly diagnosed childhood cancer patients. | Scollon S et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Open access data sharing in genomic research. | Pereira S et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Parents' preferences for return of results in pediatric genomic research. | Ziniel SI et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Pediatric data sharing in genomic research: attitudes and preferences of parents. | Burstein MD et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Revisiting respect for persons in genomic research. | Mathews DJ et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Routes for breaching and protecting genetic privacy. | Erlich Y et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| What ethical and legal principles should guide the genotyping of children as part of a personalised screening programme for common cancer? | Hall AE et al. | — | 2014 | → |
| Ethical, legal, and counseling challenges surrounding the return of genetic results in oncology. | Lolkema MP et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| Evolving approaches to the ethical management of genomic data. | McEwen JE et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| NCI think tank concerning the identifiability of biospecimens and "omic" data. | Weil CJ et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| Participants' recall and understanding of genomic research and large-scale data sharing. | Robinson JO et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| Policy uncertainty, sequencing, and cell lines. | Caulfield T et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| The ethics of secondary data analysis: considering the application of Belmont principles to the sharing of neuroimaging data. | Brakewood B et al. | — | 2013 | → |
| Balancing the risks and benefits of genomic data sharing: genome research participants' perspectives. | Oliver JM et al. | — | 2012 | → |
| Data sharing in the post-genomic world: the experience of the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC) Data Access Compliance Office (DACO). | Joly Y et al. | — | 2012 | → |
| To share or not to share: that is not the question. | Ohno-Machado L | — | 2012 | → |