Standardization and omics science: Technical and social dimensions are inseparable and demand symmetrical study

OMICS A Journal of Integrative Biology

Volumn 14, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 327-332

  Holmes, Christina ^a   McDonald, Fiona ^b   Jones, Mavis ^c   Ozdemir, Vural ^d   Graham, Janice E ^a  

^a DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMICS; ENVIRONMENT; ETHICS; GENOMICS; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; LABORATORY; LEGAL ASPECT; METABOLOMICS; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEOMICS; QUALITY CONTROL; RESEARCH; REVIEW; SAFETY; SCIENTIST; SOCIAL ASPECT; SOCIOLOGY; STANDARDIZATION; TECHNOLOGY;

COMMUNICATION; GENOMICS; HUMANS; PROTEOMICS; REFERENCE STANDARDS; RESEARCH; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

EID: 77954209548     PISSN: 15362310     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1089/omi.2010.0022     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. Almklov, P.G. (2008). Standardized data and singular situations. Soc Stud Sci 38, 873-897.
2. Angiuoli, S.V., Gussman, A., Klimke, W., Cochrane, G., Field, D., Garrity, G.M., et al. (2008). Toward an online repository of standard operating procedures (SOPs) for (meta)genomic annotation. OMICS 12, 137-141.
3. Ball, C.A., and Brazma, A. (2006). MGED standards: work in progress. OMICS 10, 138-144.
4. Bowker, G.C., and Star, S.L. (1999). Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).
5. Brooksbank, C., and Quackenbush, J. (2006). Data standards: a call to action. OMICS 10, 94-99.
6. Deangelis, C.D., Fontanarosa, P.B., and Flanagin, A. (2001). Reporting financial conflicts of interest and relationships between investigators and research sponsors. JAMA 286, 89-91.
7. Fiehn, O., Kristal, B., Ommen, B.V., Sumner, L.W., Sansone, S.A., Taylor, C., et al. (2006). Establishing reporting standards for metabolomic and metabonomic studies: a call for participation. OMICS 10, 158-163.
8. Field, D., and Sansone, S.A. (2006). A special issue on data standards. OMICS 10, 84-93.
9. Field, D., Garrity, G.M., Sansone, S.A., Sterk, P., Gray, T., Kyrpides, N., et al. (2008a). Meeting report: the fifth genomic standards consortium (GSC) workshop. OMICS 12, 109-113. (Pubitemid 351873441)
10. Field, D., Glöckner, F.O., Garrity, G.M., Gray, T., Sterk, P., Cochrane, G., et al. (2008b). Meeting report: the fourth genomic standards consortium (GSC) workshop. OMICS 12, 101-108. (Pubitemid 351873433)
11. Field, D., Sansone, S.A., and Garrity, G.M. (2008c). Foreword to the special issue on the fifth genomic standards consortium workshop. OMICS 12, 99. (Pubitemid 351873432)
12. Garrity,G.M., Field,D., Kyrpides,N., Hirschman, L., Sansone, S.A., Angiuoli, S., et al. (2008). Toward a standards-compliant genomic and metagenomic publication record. Omics 12, 157-160.
13. Graham, J., Rockwood, K., Beattie, K., McDowell, B., Eastwood, M., and Gauthier, S. (1996). Standardization of the diagnosis of dementia in the Canadian study of health and aging. Neuroepidemiology 15, 246-256.
14. Graham, J.E. (2008). Facilitating regulation: the dance of statistical significance and clinical meaningfulness in standardizing technologies for dementia. Biosocieties 3, 241-263.
15. Gregersen, B., and Johnson, B. (1997). Learning economies, innovation systems and European integration. Reg Stud 31, 479-490.
16. Hogan, J.M., Higdon, R., and Kolker, E. (2006). Experimental standards for high-throughput proteomics. OMICS 10, 152-157.
17. Hogle, L.F. (1995). Standardization across non-standard domains: the case of organ procurement. Sci Technol Hum Val 20, 482-500.
18. Hogle, L.F. (2008). Collectivities and the Quest for the Standardized Cell. American Anthropological Association, 107th Annual Meeting. San Francisco, CA, American Anthropological Association.
19. Hogle, L.F. (2009). Pragmatic objectivity and the standardization of engineered tissues. Soc Stud Sci 39, 717-742.
20. Jones, M., and Graham, J. (2009). Multiple institutional rationalities in the implementation of new public policy: an ethnographic examination. Sci Public Policy 36, 445-455.
21. Jordan, K., and Lynch, M. (1998). The dissemination, standardization and routinization of a molecular biological technique. Soc Stud Sci 28, 773-800.
22. Khoury, M.J., Gwinn, M., Yoon, P.W., Dowling, N., Moore, C.A., and Bradley, L. (2007). The continuum of translation research in genomic medicine: how can we accelerate the appropriate integration of human genome discoveries into health care and disease prevention? Genet Med 9, 665-674.
23. Kolker, E. (2009).OMICS: 2009, 2010, and beyond. OMICS 13, 451.
24. Landry, R., Amara, N., Pablos-Mendes, A., Shademani, R., and Gold, I. (2006). The knowledge-value chain: a conceptual framework for knowledge translation in health. Bull World Health Org 84, 597-602.
25. Latour, B., and Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).
26. Leebens-Mack, J., Vision, T., Brenner, E., Bowers, J.E., Cannon, S., Clement, M.J., et al. (2006). Taking the first steps towards a standard for reporting on phylogenies: minimum information about a phylogenetic analysis (MIAPA). OMICS 10, 231-237.
27. Lewis, S., Baird, P., Evans, R.G., Ghali, W.A., Wright, C.J., Gibson, E., et al. (2001). Dancing with the porcupine: rules for governing the university-industry relationship. CMAJ 165, 783-785.
28. Mattli, W. (2001). The politics and economics of international institutional standards setting: an introduction. J Eur Public Policy 8, 328-344.
29. Morrison,N.,Wood,A.J.,Hancock, D., Shah, S.,Hakes, L., Gray, T., et al. (2006). Standard annotation of environmentalOMICS data: application to the transcriptomics domain. OMICS 10, 172-178.
30. Ozdemir, V., Suarez-Kurtz, G., Stenne, R., Somogyi, A.A., Someya, T., Kayaalp, S.O., et al. (2009). Risk assessment and communication tools for genotype associations with multifactorial phenotypes: the concept of edge effects and cultivating an ethical bridge between omics innovations and society. OMICS 13, 43-61.
31. Paci, D., and Ibarreta, D. (2009). Economic and cost-effectiveness considerations for pharmacogenetics tests: an integral part of translational research and innovation uptake in personalized medicine. Curr Pharmacogenomics Person Med 7, 284-296.
32. Pang, T. (2009). Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine for the developing world-too soon or just-in-time? A personal view from the World Health Organization. Curr Pharmacogenomics Person Med 7, 149-157.
33. Rothstein, H., Irwin, A., Yearley, S., and McCarthy, E. (1999). Regulatory science, Europeanization, and the control of agrochemicals. Sci Technol Hum Val 24, 241-264.
34. Salter, L., Levy, E., and Leiss, W. (1988). Mandated Science: Science and Scientists in the Making of Standards. (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, MA).
35. Shapiro, S. (1997). Degrees of freedom: the interaction of standards of practice and engineering judgment. Sci Technol Hum Val 22, 286-316.
36. Sterk, P., Kersey, P.J., and Apweiler, R. (2006). Genome reviews: standardizing content and representation of information about complete genomes. OMICS 10, 114-118.
37. Stossel, T.P. (2005). Regulating academic-industrial research relationships. N Engl J Med 353, 1060-1065.
38. Taylor, C.F., Hermjakob, H., Julian, R.K., Garavelli, J.S., Aebersold, R., and Apweiler, R. (2006). The work of the human proteome organisation's proteomics standards initiative (HUPO PSI). OMICS 10, 145-151.
39. Timmermans, S., and Berg, M. (1997). Standardization in action: achieving local universality through medical protocols. Soc Stud Sci 27, 273-305. (Pubitemid 127431069)
40. Winickoff, D.E., and Bushey, D.M. (2009). Science and power in global food regulation: the rise of the codex alimentarius. Sci Technol Hum Val 0162243909334242.
41. Ye, X., Blonder, J., and Veenstra, T.D. (2009). Targeted proteomics for validation of biomarkers in clinical samples. Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic 8, 126-135.
42. Zimmerman, A.S. (2008). New knowledge from old data: the role of standards in the sharing and reuse of ecological data. Sci Technol Hum Val 33, 631-652.