Biobanks and the phantom public

Human Genetics

Volumn 130, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 433-440

  Gottweis, Herbert ^a,b   Chen, Haidan ^c   Starkbaum, Johannes ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b Kyung Hee University   (South Korea)

^c ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOBANK; EUROPE; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; PERCEPTION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRE; UNITED KINGDOM; UNITED STATES; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHINA; HUMAN; ICELAND; PUBLIC RELATIONS; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

BIOLOGICAL SPECIMEN BANKS; CHINA; COMMUNITY-INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS; EUROPE; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; ICELAND; PUBLIC OPINION; SOCIAL JUSTICE;

EID: 80053339738     PISSN: 03406717     EISSN: 14321203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00439-011-1065-y     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Asai A, Ohnishi M et al (2004) Focus group interviews examining attitudes towards medical research among the Japanese: a qualitative study. Bioethics 18:448-470 (Pubitemid 39213946)
2. Bexelius C, Hoeyer K, et al (2007) Will forensic use of medical biobanks decrease public trust in healthcare services? Some empirical observations. Scand J Public Health 35(4):442
3. BIOMONITOR. http://www.univie.ac.at/LSG/projects.htm. Accessed 14 July 2011
4. Calnan MW, Sanford E (2004) Public trust in health care: the system or the doctor? Qual Saf Health Care 13(2):92-97 (Pubitemid 38496859)
5. Chabanon (2010) Informing and obtaining consent for biobanking from cancer patients treated at a single institution: studying patient perception and motivations. Presentation at the BBMRI workshop: Biobanking for Science
6. Chadwick R, Berg K (2001) Solidarity and equity: new ethical frameworks for genetic databases. Nat Rev Genet 2(4):318-321 (Pubitemid 33674780)
7. Chen DT, Rosenstein DL et al (2005) Research with stored biological samples: what do research participants want? Arch Intern Med 165(6):652-655 (Pubitemid 40393147)
8. Corrigan O, Petersen A (2008) UK biobank: bioethics as a technology of governance. In: Gottweis H, Petersen A (eds) Biobanks: governance in comparative pespective. Routledge, London, pp 143-158
9. Critchley CR, Nicol D et al (2010) Predicting intention to biobank: a national survey. Eur J Public Health. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckq136
10. European Commission (2010a) Europeans and biotechnology in 2010. Winds of change? In: Gaskell G, European Union (eds) Eurobarometer. European Commission, Brussels
11. European Commission (2010b) Science and Technology. Special Eurobarometer 340. European Commission, Brussels
12. European Commission (2010c) Public opinion in the European Union. Eurobarometer 72. European Commission, Brussels
13. Gaskell G, Gottweis H (2011) Biobanks need publicity. Nature 471:159-171
14. Godard B, Ozdemir V et al (2010) Ethnocultural community leaders' views and perceptions on biobanks and population speciWc genomic research: a qualitative research study. Public Understand Sci 19(4):469
15. Godard B, Marshall J et al (2007) Community engagement in genetic research: results of the Wrst public consultation for the Quebec CARTaGENE project. Commun Genet 10(3):147-158 (Pubitemid 46944290)
16. Goodson ML, Vernon BG (2004) A study of public opinion on the use of tissue samples from living subjects for clinical research. J Clin Pathol 57:135-138 (Pubitemid 38177748)
17. Gottweis H (2008a) Biobanks in action. In: Gottweis H, Petersen A (eds) Biobanks: governance in comparative perspective. Routledge, London and New York, pp 22-38
18. Gottweis H (2008b) Participation and the new governance of life. BioSocieties 3:265-285
19. Gottweis H (2009) Good biobank governance. How to avoid failure. Med Philosophy 30:8-13 (in Chinese)
20. Haddow G, Laurie G et al (2007) Tackling community concerns about commercialisation and genetic research: a modest interdisciplinary proposal. Soc Sci Med 64(2):272-282 (Pubitemid 44894658)
21. Hemminki E, Tupasela A et al (2009) Finnish people's attitudes towards biomedical research and its sponsorship. Genomics Soc Policy 5(2):67-79
22. Hoeyer K (2002) ConXicting notions of personhood in genetic research. Anthropol Today 18(5):1-5
23. Hoeyer K (2003) Science is really needed-that's all I know. Informed consent and the non-verbal practices of collecting blood for genetic research in Sweden. New Genet Soc 22(3):224-229
24. Hoeyer K (2008) The ethics of research biobanking. A critical review of the literature. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev 25:429-452
25. Hoeyer K, Olofsson B-O et al (2005) The ethics of research using biobanks: reason to question the importance attributed to informed consent. Arch Intern Med 165(1):97-100 (Pubitemid 40096089)
26. Hoeyer K, Olofsson BO et al (2004) Informed consent and biobanks: a population-based study of attitudes towards tissue donation for genetic research. Scand J Public Health 32(3):224-229
27. Jack AL, Womack C (2003) Why surgical patients do not donate tissue for commercial research: review of records. BMJ 327(7409):262 (Pubitemid 36951597)
28. Kaufman D, Murphy-Bollinger J et al (2009) Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. Am J Human Genet 85(5):643-654
29. Kettis-Lindblad A, Ring L et al (2007) Perceptions of potential donors in the Swedish public towards information and consent procedures in relation to use of human tissue samples in biobanks: a population-based study. Scand J Public Health 35:148-156 (Pubitemid 46567459)
30. Knoppers BM (2010) Consent to 'personal' genomics and privacy. Direct-to-consumer genetic tests and population genome research challenge traditional notions of privacy and consent. EMBO Rep 11(6):416-419
31. Knoppers BM, Chadwick R (2005) Human genetic research: emerging trends in ethics. Nat Rev Genet 6(1):75-79 (Pubitemid 39657899)
32. Lemke A, Wolf W et al (2010) Public and biobank participant attitudes toward genetic research participation and data sharing. Public Health Genomics 13:368-377
33. Lezaun J (2007) A market of opinions: the political epistemology of focus groups. Sociol Rev 55(s2):130-151
34. Lippmann W (1993) The phantom public: library of conservative thought (International Organizations Series). Transaction, Brunswick
35. Lü L (2009) The value of the use of biotechnology. Public views in China and Europe. Public Understand Sci 18:481-492
36. Marres N (2007) The issues deserve more credit: pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy. Soc Studies Sci 37:759-780
37. McGuire A, CaulWeld T et al (2008) Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing. Nat Rev Genet 9(2):152-156 (Pubitemid 351147709)
38. Nicol D, Critchley C (2009) What beneWt sharing arrangements do people want from biobanks? A survey of public opinion in Australia. In: Stranger M, Kaye J (eds) Principles and practice in biobank governance. Ashgate, Aldershot
39. Nilstun T, Hermerén G (2006) Human tissue samples and ethics. Med Health Care Philos 9(1):81-86 (Pubitemid 43632093)
40. Palsson G (2008) The rise and fall of a biobank: the case of Iceland. In: Gottweis H, Petersen A (eds) Biobanks governance in comparative perspective. Routledge, Abingdon
41. Pálsson G, Rabinow P (2005) The Iceland controversy: reXections on the transnational market of civic virtue. In: Ong A, Collier SJ (eds) Global assemblages. Technology, politics, and ethics as anthropological problems. Blackwell, Malden, Oxford, Carlton, pp 91-104
42. Pálsson G, Har∂̌ardóttir KE et al (2002) For whom the cell tolls. Curr Anthropol 43(3):271-301
43. Pentz RD, Billot L et al (2006) Research on stored biological samples: views of African American and White American cancer patients. Am J Med Genet 140A:733-739
44. Pulley J, Brace M et al (2008) Attitudes and perceptions of patients towards methods of establishing a DNA biobank. Cell Tissue Banking 9(1):55-65 (Pubitemid 351279801)
45. Stranger M, Kaye J (2009) Governing biobanks. An introduction. In: Kaye J, Stranger M (eds) Principles and practice in biobank governance. Ashgate, Farnham, Burlington, pp 1-12
46. Stranger M, Bell E et al (2008) Human genetic databanks in Australia. Indications of inconsistency and confusion. New Genet Soc 27(4):311-321
47. Sung WC (2009) Within borders. Risks and the development of biobanking in China. In: Sleebom-Faulkner M (ed) Human genetic biobanks in Asia. Politics of trust and scientific advancement. Routledge, London, pp 168-188
48. Tupasela A, Sihvo S et al (2010) Attitudes towards biomedical use of tissue sample collections, consent, and biobanks among Finns. Scand J Public Health 38(46):45-52
49. Tutton R (2002) Gift relationships in genetics research. Sci Cult 11(4):523-542
50. Tutton R (2007) Constructing participation in genetic databases: citizenship, governance, and ambivalence. Sci Technol Human 32(2):172-195
51. UK Biobank (2002a) BioBank UK: a question of trust: a consultation exploring and addressing questions of public trust. People Science and Policy Ltd, London
52. UK Biobank (2002b) The UK biobank ethics consultation workshop. Conference report. http://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/docs/ethics-work.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2011
53. UK Biobank (2003) UK biobank consultation on the ethical and governance framework. People Science and Policy Ltd, London
54. UK Biobank (2008) Public attitudes to biobanks and related ethics and governance issues. The Ethics and Governance Council. http://www.egcukbiobank. org.uk/assets/wtx048967.pdf. Accessed 13 July 2011
55. Wang SS, Fridinger F et al (2001) Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. Community Genet 4:18-26 (Pubitemid 32722266)
56. Wendler D (2006) One-time general consent for research on biological samples. Br Med J 332(7540):544-547 (Pubitemid 44364375)
57. Wong ML, Chia KS et al (2004) Willingness to donate blood samples for genetic research. A survey from a community in Singapore. Clin Genet 65:45-51 (Pubitemid 38111402)
58. Wynne B (1995) Public understanding of science. In: JasanoV S, Markle GE, Petersen JC, Pinch T (eds) Handbook of science and technology studies. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 361-388