Community perspectives on public health biobanking: An analysis of community meetings on the Michigan BioTrust for Health

Journal of Community Genetics

Volumn 5, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 125-138

  Thiel, Daniel B ^a   Platt, Tevah ^a   Platt, Jodyn ^a   King, Susan B ^a   Kardia, Sharon L R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Biobank; Community engagement; Informed consent; Newborn screening; Public health

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; BIOBANK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION MAKING; DRIED BLOOD SPOT TESTING; FEMALE; HEALTH BELIEF; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INFORMED CONSENT; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MINORITY GROUP; NEWBORN SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84899044783     PISSN: 1868310X     EISSN: 18686001     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12687-013-0162-0     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Botkin JR, Rothwell E, Anderson R, Stark L, Goldenberg A, Lewis M, Wong B (2012) Public attitudes regarding the use of residual newborn screening specimens for research. Pediatrics 129(2):231-238. doi:10.1542/peds.2011-0970
2. Caplan A (2009) The ethics of research biobanking. Dordrecht; London, Springer
3. Clayton EW (2005) Informed consent and biobanks. J Law Med Ethics 33(1):15-21. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2005.tb00206.x
4. Couzin-Frankel J (2009) Science gold mine, ethical minefield. Science 324(5924):166-168
5. Freelon D (2010) ReCal/Intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. Int J Internet Sci 5(1):20-33
6. Friedman CP, Wong AK, Blumenthal D (2010) Achieving a nationwide learning health system. Sci Transl Med 2(57):7
7. Health Resources and Services Administration 2011 Considerations and Recommendations for National Guidance Regarding the Retention and Use of Residual Dried Blood Spot Specimens After Newborn Screening. (2011). (Briefing Paper). Retrieved from: http://www.hrsa.gov/advisorycommittees/mchbadvisory/ heritabledisorders/recommendations/correspondence/briefingdriedblood.pdf
8. HHS.gov (2013) "Regulatory Changes in ANPRM." http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/anprmchangetable.html accessed 3 April 2013
9. Kaye J, Curren L, Anderson N, Edwards K, Fullerton SM, Kanellopoulou N, Lund D et al (2012) From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nat Rev Genet 13(5):371-376
10. Lewis M, Goldenberg A, Anderson R, Rothwell E, Botkin J (2011) State laws regarding the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples. Pediatrics 127(4):703-712. doi:10.1542/peds.2010-1468
11. Lidz C, Garverich S (2013) What the ANPRM missed: additional needs for IRB reform. J Law Med Ethics 41(2):390 -396. doi:10.1111/jlme.12050
12. Mongoven A, McGee H (2012) IRB Review and Public Health Biobanking: A Case Study of the Michigan BioTrust for Health. IRB: Ethics & Human Research
13. Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, LeRoy L, Hudson K (2009) Public perspectives on informed consent for biobanking. Am J Public Health 99(12):2128-2134
14. Olney RS, Moore CA, Ojodu JA, Lindegren ML, Hannon WH (2006) Storage and use of residual dried blood spots from state newborn screening programs. J Pediatr 148(5):618-622 (Pubitemid 43776916)
15. Petrini C (2010) "Broad" consent, exceptions to consent, and the question of using biological samples for research purposes different from the initial collection purpose. Soc Sci Med 70:217-220. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed. 2009.10.004
16. Platt J, Platt T, Thiel D, Kardia SLR (2013) 'Born in Michigan? You're in the Biobank': Engaging Population Biobank Participants through Facebook Advertisements. Public Health Genomics 16(4). doi:10.1159/000351451
17. Rothwell E, Anderson R, Botkin J (2010) Policy issues and stakeholder concerns regarding the storage and use of residual newborn dried blood samples for research. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 11(1):5-12
18. Rothwell E, Anderson R, Goldenberg A, Lewis MH, Stark L, Burbank M, Botkin JR (2012) Assessing public attitudes on the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples: a focus group study. Soc Sci Med 74(8):1305-1309. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.12.047
19. Shickle D (2006) The Consent Problem within DNA Biobanks. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 37(3):503-519. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2006.06. 007
20. Simon CM, L'Heureux J, Murray JC, Winokur P, Weiner G, Newbury E, Zimmerman B (2011) Active choice but not too active: public perspectives on biobank consent models. Genet Med 13(9):821-831. doi:10.1097/GIM. 0b013e31821d2f88
21. State of the State Survey-60 (2011) Retrieved from MSU Institute for Public Policy and Social Research: http://www.ippsr.msu.edu/SOSS
22. State of the State Survey-63 (2012) Retrieved from MSU Institute for Public Policy and Social Research: http://www.ippsr.msu.edu/SOSS
23. Tarini BA, Goldenberg A, Singer D, Clark SJ, Butchart A, Davis MM (2010) Not without my permission: parents' willingness to permit use of newborn screening samples for research. Public Health Genomics 13(3):125- 130. doi:10.1159/000228724
24. Terry SF, Shelton R, Biggers G, Baker D, Edwards K (2013) The haystack is made of needles Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers 17(3):175-177. doi:10.1089/gtmb.2012.1542
25. Terry SF, Terry PF, (2011) Power to the people: Participant ownership of clinical trial data. Sci Transl Med 3(69):69cm3
26. Wendler D (2006) One-time general consent for research on biological samples. BMJ 332(7540):544-547. doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7540.544
27. Williams BA, Wolf LE (2013) Biobanking, consent, and certificates of confidentiality: does the ANPRM muddy the water? J Law Med Ethics 41(2):440-453. doi:10.1111/jlme.12054