Suppr超能文献

开放数据政策对参与人体研究同意书的影响:参与者行为与报告担忧之间的差异

Impact of Open Data Policies on Consent to Participate in Human Subjects Research: Discrepancies between Participant Action and Reported Concerns.

作者信息

Cummings Jorden A, Zagrodney Jessica M, Day T Eugene

机构信息

Department of Psychology, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Office of Safety and Medical Operations, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2015 May 20;10(5):e0125208. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125208. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

Research outlets are increasingly adopting open data policies as a requisite for publication, including studies with human subjects data. We investigated whether open data policies influence participants' rate of consent by randomly assigning participants to view consent forms with and without discussion of open data policies. No participants declined to participate, regardless of condition, nor did rates of drop-out vs. completion vary between conditions. Furthermore, no significant change in potential consent rates was reported when participants were openly asked about the influence of open data policies on their likelihood of consent. However, follow-up analyses indicated possible poor attention to consent forms, consistent with previous research. Moreover, thematic analysis of participants' considerations of open data policy indicated multiple considerations such as concerns regarding confidentiality, anonymity, data security, and study sensitivity. The impact of open data policies on participation raises complex issues at the intersection of ethics and scientific innovation. We conclude by encouraging researchers to consider participants as stakeholders in open data policy and by providing recommendations for open data policies in human subjects research.

摘要

研究机构越来越多地采用开放数据政策作为发表的必要条件,包括涉及人类受试者数据的研究。我们通过随机分配参与者查看包含和不包含开放数据政策讨论的同意书,来调查开放数据政策是否会影响参与者的同意率。无论处于何种情况,均没有参与者拒绝参与,不同情况之间的退出率与完成率也没有差异。此外,当直接询问参与者开放数据政策对其同意可能性的影响时,潜在同意率没有显著变化。然而,后续分析表明参与者可能对同意书关注不足,这与先前的研究一致。此外,对参与者对开放数据政策考虑因素的主题分析表明了多种考虑因素,如对保密性、匿名性、数据安全性和研究敏感性的担忧。开放数据政策对参与的影响在伦理与科学创新的交叉点上引发了复杂问题。我们在结论中鼓励研究人员将参与者视为开放数据政策的利益相关者,并为人类受试者研究中的开放数据政策提供建议。

相似文献

2
Excluding particular information from consent forms.在同意书中排除特定信息。
Account Res. 2005 Jan-Mar;12(1):33-45. doi: 10.1080/08989620590918916.
8
Obtaining informed consent and other ethical dilemmas.获取知情同意及其他伦理困境。
Indian J Med Ethics. 2008 Apr-Jun;5(2):79-83. doi: 10.20529/IJME.2008.027.

引用本文的文献

1
The academic impact of Open Science: a scoping review.开放科学的学术影响:一项范围综述
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Mar 5;12(3):241248. doi: 10.1098/rsos.241248. eCollection 2025 Mar.
8
Open synthesis and the coronavirus pandemic in 2020.开放合成与 2020 年的冠状病毒大流行。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Oct;126:184-191. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.06.032. Epub 2020 Jul 1.
9
A beginner's guide to data stewardship and data sharing.数据管理与数据共享新手指南。
Spinal Cord. 2019 Mar;57(3):169-182. doi: 10.1038/s41393-018-0232-6. Epub 2019 Feb 5.

本文引用的文献

4
Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks.通过社交网络的大规模情感传染的实验证据。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jun 17;111(24):8788-90. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320040111. Epub 2014 Jun 2.
5
Open data.开放数据
N Engl J Med. 2014 Feb 13;370(7):662. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1400850. Epub 2014 Jan 22.
6
Open data: a sustainable model.
Science. 2013 Nov 29;342(6162):1042. doi: 10.1126/science.342.6162.1042-a.
7
UK push to open up patients' data.英国推动开放患者数据。
Nature. 2013 Oct 17;502(7471):283. doi: 10.1038/502283a.
9
Searching for novelty: challenges with open access data.
Ann Neurol. 2012 Dec;72(6):983. doi: 10.1002/ana.23755.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验