Cited by 21Ethics in Clinical ResearchEthics and bioethics in healthcareBiomedical Ethics and Regulation

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

International requirements for consent in biobank research: qualitative review of research guidelines

Hirschberg, Irene, Kahrass, Hannes, Strech, Daniel·2014·Journal of Medical Genetics

Abstract

Several stakeholders in the field of biobank research are currently developing and evaluating innovative consent procedures, and in doing so refer to national and international guidelines that regulate biomedical research. The objectives of this study were to present (1) a synthesis of all consent issues mentioned or required in guidelines that are of potential relevance to biobank research and (2) a detailed overview of similarities and differences between these guidelines. This analysis considered a purposive sample of the nine most internationally recognised research guidelines plus a national checklist for developing consent forms. The synthesis of all included research guidelines found 41 issues of potential relevance to consent procedures in biobank research. The guidelines differ substantially with respect to (1) how comprehensively they address these consent issues, (2) their definition and explanation of the issues and (3) how directly or indirectly the issues are mentioned. The set of 41 consent issues presented in this paper should be further developed in a continuous process. Our findings on the differences among major research guidelines also raise the issue of a more systematic development and revision process for these guidelines. The presented set of content issues potentially relevant to consent in biobank research can inform the balanced development or evaluation of consent forms, as well as the development and revision of corresponding research guidelines.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jmedgenet-2014-102692

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Regulations and guidelines concerning informed consent are not necessarily specific to biospecimen research, nor are they harmonized.

    “Furthermore, regulations and guidelines concerning informed consent are not necessarily specific to biospecimen research, nor are they harmonized (40, 59).”

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. Capron AM . Legal and regulatory standards of informed consent in research. In: Emanuel EJ , Grady C , Crouch RA , Lie RK , Miller FG , Wendler D, eds . Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008:613–32. · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.pec.2007.12.003 · DOI
  3. 10.1038/embor.2008.41 · DOI
  4. 10.1038/ejhg.2012.297 · DOI
  5. 10.1183/09031936.00165006 · DOI
  6. Beier K , Lenk C . A unified European approach on tissue research and biobanking? A comparison. In: Lenk C , Sándor J , Gordijn B , eds. Biobanks and tissue research—the public, the patient and the regulation. Dordrecht: Springer, 2011:143–64. · DOI
  7. 10.1038/sj.embor.7400740 · DOI
  8. Hirschberg, 2013, Practice variation across consent templates for biobank research. A survey of German biobanks, Front Genet, 4, 240, 10.3389/fgene.2013.00240 · DOI
  9. Council of Europe. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine Strasbourg Council of Europe. 1997. · DOI
  10. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Directive 2001/20/EC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. Official Journal of the European Communities. Luxembourg 2001.
  11. Emanuel EJ , Grady C , Crouch RA , Lie RK , Miller FG , Wendler D . Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. · DOI
  12. Saldaña J . The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2013.
  13. 10.1192/bjp.bp.112.116335 · DOI
  14. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001498 · DOI
  15. 10.1371/journal.pone.0013302 · DOI
  16. Flory JH , Wendler D , EJ E . Empirical issues in informed consent for research. In: Emanuel EJ , Grady C , Crouch RA , Lie RK , Miller FG , Wendler D, eds . Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008:645–60. · DOI
  17. 10.1191/1740774505cn066oa · DOI
  18. 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE · DOI · Paper page
  19. 10.1056/NEJMsb0902598 · DOI
  20. Appelbaum PS , Lidz CW . The therapeutic misconception. In: Emanuel EJ , Grady C , Crouch RA , Lie RK , Miller FG , Wendler D , eds. Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008:633–44. · DOI
  21. 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040324 · DOI
  22. 10.1586/erm.12.116 · DOI
  23. 10.3325/cmj.2011.52.262 · DOI
  24. 10.1136/jme.2010.039255 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Hirschberg, I., Kahrass, H., & Strech, D.
Affiliations
Medizinische Hochschule Hannover (DE)
Corresponding author
Strech, Daniel
Venue
Journal of Medical Genetics
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-10-28
Volume
51
Issue
12
Pages
773-781
ISSN
  • 0022-2593 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-6244
OpenAlex
W2059310263
Cited by
21
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2
FWCI
3.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Medical Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
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 › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Biomedical Ethics and Regulation
Keywords
informed consent, biobank research, research guidelines, informed consent forms, research ethics regulation, guideline comparison
MeSH terms
Humans, Guidelines as Topic, Biological Specimen Banks, Biomedical Research

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