Cited by 293Ethics in Clinical ResearchSocial Media in Health EducationMental Health and Patient Involvement

From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research

Open access
Kaye, Jane, Curren, Liam, Anderson, Nick, Edwards, Kelly, Fullerton, Stephanie M., Kanellopoulou, Nadja, Lund, David, MacArthur, Daniel G. +5 more·2012·Nature Reviews Genetics

Abstract

Advances in computing technology and bioinformatics mean that medical research is increasingly characterized by large international consortia of researchers that are reliant on large data sets and biobanks. These trends raise a number of challenges for obtaining consent, protecting participant privacy concerns and maintaining public trust. Participant-centred initiatives (PCIs) use social media technologies to address these immediate concerns, but they also provide the basis for long-term interactive partnerships. Here, we give an overview of this rapidly moving field by providing an analysis of the different PCI approaches, as well as the benefits and challenges of implementing PCIs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrg3218

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • The notion of dynamic consent was first coined within the EnCoRe project by Professor Kaye and her team as a way to provide dynamic and granular options for revocation in system design.

    “It was within the EnCoRe project that the notion of dynamic consent was first coined by Professor Kaye and her team [97] as a way to provide dynamic and granular options for revocation in system design [96].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [23]Al-Ubaydli MA Smith R The BMA has adopted an old fashioned, paternalistic, and misguided policy by warning against patients having access to their electronic records BMJ Rapid Response [online] 2011 http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2011/11/03/bma-has-adopted-old-fashioned-paternalistic-and-misguided-policy-warning-a

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kaye, J., Curren, L., Anderson, N., Edwards, K., Fullerton, S. M., Kanellopoulou, N., Lund, D., MacArthur, D. G., Mascalzoni, D., Shepherd, J., Taylor, P. L., Terry, S. F., & Winter, S. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • HW Communications (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Eurac Research (IT)
  • Churchill Hospital (GB)
  • Genetic Alliance (US)
  • Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
Corresponding author
Kaye, Jane
Venue
Nature Reviews Genetics
Published
2012-04-03
Volume
13
Issue
5
Pages
371-376
ISSN
  • 1471-0056 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0064
OpenAlex
W2027139930
Cited by
293
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 14
FWCI
5.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (096599/2/11/Z, 096599)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/G002541/1)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR025014)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Ethics in Clinical Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Social Media in Health Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Keywords
social media, research participant engagement, research governance, participant privacy, public trust in research, biobanks, research consortium
MeSH terms
Humans, Informed Consent, Privacy, Computational Biology, Biomedical Research, Social Media

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