Suppr超能文献

关于使用去识别数据的观点比较。

A comparison of views regarding the use of de-identified data.

机构信息

University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.

University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

出版信息

Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):113-118. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx054.

Abstract

Data sharing of large genomic databases and biorepositories provides researchers adequately powered samples to advance the goals of precision medicine. Data sharing may also introduce, however, participant privacy concerns including possible reidentification. This study compares views of research participants, genetic researchers, and institutional review board (IRB) professionals regarding concerns about the use of de-identified data. An online survey was completed by cancer patients, their relatives, and controls from the Northwest Cancer Genetics Registry (n = 450) querying views about potential harms with the use of de-identified data. This was compared to our previous online national survey of human genetic researchers (n = 351) and IRB professionals (n = 208). Researchers were less likely to feel that participants would be personally identified or harmed from a study involving de-identified data or feel that a federal agency might compel researchers to disclose information about research participants. Compared to genetic researchers, IRB professionals and participants were significantly more likely to express that personal identification or harm was likely or that researchers might be forced to disclose information by a federal agency. An understanding of the differences in views regarding possible harm from the use of de-identified data between these three important stakeholder groups is necessary to move forward with genomic research.

摘要

大型基因组数据库和生物库的数据共享为研究人员提供了足够的样本,以推进精准医学的目标。然而,数据共享也可能引发参与者的隐私问题,包括可能的重新识别。本研究比较了研究参与者、遗传研究人员和机构审查委员会(IRB)专业人员对使用去识别数据的担忧。通过西北癌症遗传学登记处(n = 450)的癌症患者、他们的亲属和对照者进行了一项在线调查,询问他们对使用去识别数据可能带来的潜在危害的看法。这与我们之前对全国人类遗传研究人员(n = 351)和 IRB 专业人员(n = 208)的在线调查进行了比较。研究人员认为,参与者可能会从涉及去识别数据的研究中被个人识别或受到伤害,或者认为联邦机构可能会迫使研究人员披露有关研究参与者的信息的可能性较小。与遗传研究人员相比,IRB 专业人员和参与者更有可能表示个人识别或伤害的可能性较大,或者研究人员可能会受到联邦机构的强制披露信息的压力。了解这三个重要利益相关者群体对使用去识别数据可能带来的潜在危害的看法差异,对于推进基因组研究是必要的。

相似文献

1
A comparison of views regarding the use of de-identified data.
Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):113-118. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx054.
2
Genetics researchers' and IRB professionals' attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis.
Genet Med. 2012 Feb;14(2):236-42. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.57. Epub 2012 Jan 12.
3
Attitudes toward genetic research review: results from a survey of human genetics researchers.
Public Health Genomics. 2011;14(6):337-45. doi: 10.1159/000324931. Epub 2011 Apr 11.
5
De-identified genomic data sharing: the research participant perspective.
J Community Genet. 2017 Jul;8(3):173-181. doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0300-1. Epub 2017 Apr 5.
6
Stakeholders' views on data sharing in multicenter studies.
J Comp Eff Res. 2017 Sep;6(6):537-547. doi: 10.2217/cer-2017-0009. Epub 2017 Aug 14.
7
Ethical concerns on sharing genomic data including patients' family members.
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Jun 18;19(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s12910-018-0310-5.
10
Should Researchers Offer Results to Family Members of Cancer Biobank Participants? A Mixed-Methods Study of Proband and Family Preferences.
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019 Jan-Mar;10(1):1-22. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2018.1546241. Epub 2018 Dec 31.

本文引用的文献

1
De-identified genomic data sharing: the research participant perspective.
J Community Genet. 2017 Jul;8(3):173-181. doi: 10.1007/s12687-017-0300-1. Epub 2017 Apr 5.
2
Genome privacy: challenges, technical approaches to mitigate risk, and ethical considerations in the United States.
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2017 Jan;1387(1):73-83. doi: 10.1111/nyas.13259. Epub 2016 Sep 28.
3
Consent Issues in Genetic Research: Views of Research Participants.
Public Health Genomics. 2016;19(4):220-8. doi: 10.1159/000447346. Epub 2016 Jul 5.
4
Between Openness and Privacy in Genomics.
PLoS Med. 2016 Jan 12;13(1):e1001937. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001937. eCollection 2016 Jan.
6
Patient characteristics and participation in a genetic study: a type 2 diabetes cohort.
J Investig Med. 2014 Jan;62(1):26-32. doi: 10.2310/JIM.0000000000000022.
7
Identifying personal genomes by surname inference.
Science. 2013 Jan 18;339(6117):321-4. doi: 10.1126/science.1229566.
9
Genetics researchers' and IRB professionals' attitudes toward genetic research review: a comparative analysis.
Genet Med. 2012 Feb;14(2):236-42. doi: 10.1038/gim.2011.57. Epub 2012 Jan 12.

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