Donors Perceptions of Consent to and Feedback from Biobank Research: Time to Acknowledge Diversity?
Abstract
Background: Many studies have explored public perspectives on when and how to provide informed consent to biobank research and when to get feedback on research results. Little has been done to explore overarching trends in these studies. Methods: The article is based on a critical reading of the literature found through Medline searches and the PRIVILEGED project compilation of empirical studies. Results: I suggest that tissue type, procurement situation including who is asked to provide consent, and the biobank’s geographical, social and historical context influence how various potential donors view the issues of consent, re-consent, and feedback of research results. In light of this, universal ethical standards for informed consent to and feedback of research results from biobank research seem to run contrary to the diversity of perceptions and expectations among different donors. Conclusion: To respect donor interests, it is necessary to pay more attention to diversity with regard to biobank types and different contexts for donation. We should avoid assuming that words like ‘biobank’ and ‘donor’ can be used in a generic sense – always referring to the same – if we wish to respect and care for the diverse group of individuals who comprise the donating public.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Actual practice of informed consent for biospecimen research varies, as collections of biospecimens (or biobanks) are highly heterogeneous in terms of tissue type, procurement situation, and geographic, social, and historical context.
“Actual practice varies, as collections of biospecimens (or biobanks) are highly heterogeneous in terms of tissue type, procurement situation, and geographic, social, and historical context (56, 58,60, 126, 146).”
From Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens (2016) · cites this paper as [60]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Lessons from HeLa Cells: The Ethics and Policy of Biospecimens
Beskow, L. M. (2016) · Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-083115-022536 · Cited by 146 · see citing works
“Actual practice varies, as collections of biospecimens (or biobanks) are highly heterogeneous in terms of tissue type, procurement situation, and geographic, social, and historical context (56, 58,60, 126, 146).”
BackgroundPlatt, J., Bollinger, J., Dvoskin, R., Kardia, S. L. R., & Kaufman, D. (2014) · Genetics in Medicine · doi:10.1038/gim.2013.59 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Inclusion of Residual Tissue in Biobanks: Opt-In or Opt-Out?
Giesbertz, N. A. A., Bredenoord, A. L., & van Delden, J. J. M. (2012) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001373 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hoeyer, K.
- Affiliations
- University of Copenhagen (DK)
- Corresponding author
- Hoeyer, K.
- ORCID
- Hoeyer, K.
- Venue
- Public Health Genomics
- Publisher
- S. Karger AG
- Published
- 2009-11-26
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 345-352
- ISSN
- 1422-2795 (ISSN-L)
- 1662-4246
- 1662-8063
- OpenAlex
- W2012949888
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 14
- FWCI
- 8.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Public Health Genomics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (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 › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Organ Donation and Transplantation
- Keywords
- biobanks, informed consent, donor perceptions, re-consent, tissue type, moral norms
- MeSH terms
- Feedback, Humans, Tissue Banks, Tissue Donors
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