Cited by 129Ethics in Clinical ResearchEthics and bioethics in healthcareBiomedical Ethics and Regulation

“I don’t want to be Henrietta Lacks”: diverse patient perspectives on donating biospecimens for precision medicine research

Open access
Lee, Sandra S.-J., Cho, Mildred K., Kraft, Stephanie A., Varsava, Nina, Gillespie, Katie, Ormond, Kelly E., Wilfond, Benjamin S., Magnus, David·2019·Genetics in Medicine

Abstract

Purpose To determine whether patients distinguish between biospecimens and electronic health records (EHRs) when considering research participation to inform research protections. Methods We conducted 20 focus groups with individuals who identified as African American, Hispanic, Chinese, South Asian, and non-Hispanic white on the collection of biospecimens and EHR data for research. Results Our study found that many participants did not distinguish between biospecimens and EHR data. However, some participants identified specific concerns about biospecimens. These included the need for special care and respect for biospecimens due to enduring connections between the body and identity; the potential for unacceptable future research, specifically the prospect of human cloning; heightened privacy risks; and the potential for unjust corporate profiteering. Among those who distinguished biospecimens from EHR data, many supported separate consent processes and would limit their own participation to EHR data. Conclusion Considering that the potential misuse of EHR data is as great as, if not greater than, for biospecimens, more research is needed to understand how attitudes differ between biospecimens and EHR data across diverse populations. Such research should explore mechanisms beyond consent that can address diverse values, perspectives, and misconceptions about sources of patient information to build trust in research relationships.

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/s41436-018-0032-6

Cites

28 of 28 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?

  • Although there is generally a high willingness among patients to donate data and biospecimens for precision medicine research, one study also suggests that patients expect a corresponding countervalue when pharmaceutical companies earn large sums of money from drug development that was made possible by patients' donations.

    “Although there is generally a high willingness among patients to donate data and biospecimens for precision medicine research, one study also suggests that patients expect a corresponding countervalue when pharmaceutical companies earn large sums of money from drug development that was made possible by patients' donations.”

    From Patients’ and professionals’ views related to ethical issues in precision medicine: a mixed research synthesis (2021) · cites this paper as [115]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Some participants would like to have separate consent for biospecimens and EHR data, as they see a risk for misuse of DNA in future research.

    “Some participants would like to have separate consent for biospecimens and EHR data, as they see a risk for misuse of DNA in future research [115].”
  • Some participants in the study argued that if biospecimens contributes to corporate profit, patients should be compensated.

    “Some participants in the study argued that if biospecimens contributes to corporate profit, patients should be compensated [98, 115].”
  • Some people would like to be compensated for their donation if pharmaceutical companies gain a high profit with it.

    “Nevertheless, some people would like to be compensated for their donation if pharmaceutical companies gain a high profit with it [98, 115].”

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

1 of the 29 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, S. S.-J., Cho, M. K., Kraft, S. A., Varsava, N., Gillespie, K., Ormond, K. E., Wilfond, B. S., & Magnus, D.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Seattle Children's Hospital (US)
  • Palo Alto Medical Foundation (US)
Corresponding author
Lee, Sandra S.-J.
Venue
Genetics in Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
21
Issue
1
Pages
107-113
ISSN
1098-3600 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2805736463
Cited by
129
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 4
FWCI
8.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genetics in Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Palo Alto Medical Foundation
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (R01LM012180)
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Keywords
biospecimen donation, electronic health records, research participation, patient perspectives, precision medicine, informed consent, research ethics, privacy concerns, human cloning, body and identity, research trust, racial and ethnic diversity
MeSH terms
Humans, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Surveys and Questionnaires, Research Personnel, Biological Specimen Banks, Privacy, Information Dissemination, Biomedical Research, Precision Medicine, Electronic Health Records

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