Cited by 279Ethics in Clinical ResearchEthics and bioethics in healthcarePrivacy, Security, and Data Protection

Public Opinion about the Importance of Privacy in Biobank Research

Open access
Kaufman, David J., Murphy-Bollinger, Juli, Scott, Joan, Hudson, Kathy L.·2009·The American Journal of Human Genetics

Abstract

Concerns about privacy may deter people from participating in genetic research. Recruitment and retention of biobank participants requires understanding the nature and magnitude of these concerns. Potential participants in a proposed biobank were asked about their willingness to participate, their privacy concerns, informed consent, and data sharing. A representative survey of 4659 U.S. adults was conducted. Ninety percent of respondents would be concerned about privacy, 56% would be concerned about researchers having their information, and 37% would worry that study data could be used against them. However, 60% would participate in the biobank if asked. Nearly half (48%) would prefer to provide consent once for all research approved by an oversight panel, whereas 42% would prefer to provide consent for each project separately. Although 92% would allow academic researchers to use study data, 80% and 75%, respectively, would grant access to government and industry researchers. Concern about privacy was related to lower willingness to participate only when respondents were told that they would receive $50 for participation and would not receive individual research results back. Among respondents who were told that they would receive $200 or individual research results, privacy concerns were not related to willingness. Survey respondents valued both privacy and participation in biomedical research. Despite pervasive privacy concerns, 60% would participate in a biobank. Assuring…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.10.002

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the Kaufman et al. national online survey of US adults in 2007-2008, 90% of respondents said they would be somewhat or very concerned about privacy, while 60% said they definitely or probably would be willing to participate.

    “Although 90% of respondents said they would be somewhat or very concerned about privacy, 60% said they definitely or probably would be willing to participate.”
  • In the Kaufman et al. survey, 48% preferred broad consent, 42% preferred study-specific consent, and 10% preferred categorical consent.

    “With regard to consent, 48% said they would prefer to give permission once, at the beginning of the study, for all research approved by an oversight committee. Slightly fewer (42%) said they would prefer to be asked for permission for each research project separately, and only 10% preferred to select categories of research for which they would let their materials be used.”
  • In support of proposed regulatory changes, the NPRM cited four articles reporting public opinions about biospecimen research, but these publications do not necessarily suggest consensus.

    “In support of proposed regulatory changes, the NPRM cited four articles reporting public opinions about biospecimen research (77, 128, 140, 144). But as summarized below, these publications do not necessarily suggest consensus.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 57 · Cited by 279

Authors
Kaufman, D. J., Murphy-Bollinger, J., Scott, J., & Hudson, K. L.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Kaufman, David J.
Venue
The American Journal of Human Genetics
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-11
Volume
85
Issue
5
Pages
643-654
ISSN
0002-9297 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1968416619
Cited by
279
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 22
FWCI
16.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Human Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Human Genome Research Institute (U01HG004206, 1 U01 HG004206-0)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics and bioethics in healthcare
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Privacy, Security, and Data Protection
Keywords
biobank research, privacy concerns, genetic research participation, informed consent, broad consent, data sharing, participant recruitment and retention, willingness to participate, public attitudes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Humans, Informed Consent, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Public Opinion, Cohort Studies, Biological Specimen Banks, Privacy, Biomedical Research, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review