Newspaper coverage of biobanks

PeerJ

Volumn 2014, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Ogbogu, Ubaka ^a   Toews, Maeghan ^a   Ollenberger, Adam ^a   Borry, Pascal ^b   Nobile, Helene ^b,c   Bergmann, Manuela ^c   Caulfield, Timothy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

^c GERMAN INSTITUTE OF HUMAN NUTRITION   (Germany)

Author keywords

Biobanks; Consent; ELSI; Evidence based policy; Media representations; Privacy; Public perceptions

Indexed keywords

EID: 84905707028     PISSN: None     EISSN: 21678359     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7717/peerj.500     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Allen N, Sudlow C, Downey P, Peakman T, Danesh J, Elliott P, Gallacher J, Green J,Matthews P, Pell J, Sprosen T, Collins R. 2012. UK Biobank: current status and what it means for epidemiology. Health Policy and Technology 1:123-126
2. Allen NE, Sudlow C, Peakman T, Collins R, On behalf of UK Biobank. 2014. UK Biobank data: come and get it. Science Translational Medicine 6:224ed4-224ed4
3. Árnason V. 2004. Coding and consent: moral challenges of the database project in Iceland. Bioethics 18(1):27-49
4. Barbour V. 2003. UK Biobank: a project in search of a protocol? The Lancet 361:1734-1738
5. Bemmels HR,Wolf SM, Van Ness B. 2012. Mapping the inputs, analyses, and outputs of biobank research systems to identify sources of incidental findings and individual research results for potential return to participants. Genetics in Medicine 14:385-392
6. Bracken MB, Baker D, Cauley JA, Chambers C, Culhane J, Dabelea D, Dearborn D, Drews-Botsch CD, Dudley DJ, Durkin M, Entwisle B, Flick L, Hale D, Holl J, Hovell M, Hudak M, Paneth N, Specker B,Wilhelm M,Wyatt S. 2013. New models for large prospective studies: is there a risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater? American Journal of Epidemiology 177:285-289
7. Bubela TM, Caulfield TA. 2004. Do the print media "hype" genetic research? A comparison of newspaper stories and peer-reviewed research papers. Canadian Medical Association Journal 170(9):1399-1407
8. Bubela T, Nisbet MC, Borchelt R, Brunger F, Critchley C, Einsiedel E, Geller G, Gupta A, Hampel J, Hyde-Lay R, Jandciu EW, Jones SA, Kolopack P, Lane S, Lougheed T, Nerlich B, Ogbogu U, O'Riordan K, Ouellette C, Spear M, Strauss S, Thavaratnam T,Willemse L, Caulfield T. 2009. Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology 27:514-518
9. Caulfield T. 2004. Popular media, biotechnology, and the "cycle of hype". Houston Journal of Health Law & Policy 5:213-233.
10. Caulfield T, Burningham S, Joly Y,Master Z, Shabani M, Borry P, Becker A, Burgess M, Calder K, Critchley C, Edwards K, Fullerton SM, Gottweis H, Hyde-Lay R, Illes J, Isasi R, Kato K, Kaye J, Knoppers B, Lynch J,McGuire A,Meslin E, Nicol D, O'Doherty K, Ogbogu U, Otlowski M, Pullman D, Ries N, Scott C, Sears M,Wallace H, Zawati MH. 2014. A review of the key issues associated with the commercialization of biobanks. Journal of Law and the Biosciences 1:94-110
11. Caulfield T, Bubela T,Murdoch CJ. 2008. Myriad and the mass media: the covering of a gene patent controversy. Genetics in Medicine 9:850-855
12. Caulfield T, Kaye J. 2009. Broad consent in biobanking: reflections on seemingly insurmountable dilemmas. Medical Law International 10:85-100
13. Caulfield T, Rachul C. 2011. Science spin: iPS cell research in the news. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 89(5):644-646
14. Caulfield T, Rachul C, Nelson E. 2012. Biobanking, consent, and control: a survey of Albertans on key research ethics issues. Biopreservation and Biobanking 10(5):433-438
15. Clayton EW, Ross LF. 2006. Implications of disclosing individual results of clinical research. Journal of the American Medical Association 295(1):37-38
16. Collins FS. 2004. The case for a US prospective cohort study of genes and environment. Nature 429:475-477
17. Collins R. 2012. What makes UK Biobank special? The Lancet 379:1173-1174
18. Conrad P. 2001. Genetic optimism: framing genes and mental illness in the news. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 25:225-247
19. Davidson R, Hunt K, Kitzinger J. 2003. "Radical blueprint for social change"? Media representations of new labour's policies on public health. Sociology of Health & Illness 25(6):532-552
20. Davies K. 2011. Quebec's genizon biosciences closes its doors. Bio-IT World 10(5):12.
21. Dixon-Woods M, Ashcroft RE, Jackson CJ, Tobin MD, Kivits J, Burton PR, Samani NJ. 2007. Beyond "misunderstanding": written information and decisions about taking part in a genetic epidemiology study. Social Science & Medicine 65:2212-2222
22. Frank J, Ruggiero ED,McInnes RR, Kramer M, Gagnon F. 2006. Large life-course cohorts for characterizing genetic and environmental contributions: the need for more thoughtful designs. Epidemiology 17:595-598
23. Gymrek M,McGuire AL, Golan D, Halperin E, Erlich Y. 2013. Identifying personal genomes by surname inference. Science 339:321-324
24. Haddow G. 2009. "We only did it because he asked us": gendered accounts of participation in a population genetic data collection. Social Science & Medicine 69(7):1010-1017
25. Hawkins AK. 2010. Biobanks: importance, implications and opportunities for genetic counselors. Journal of Genetic Counseling 19:423-429
26. Helgesson G. 2012. In defense of broad consent. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 21:40-50
27. Hewitt R,Watson P. 2013. Defining biobank. Biopreservation and Biobanking 11:309-315
28. Hoeyer K. 2008. The ethics of research biobanking: a critical review of the literature. Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering Reviews 25(1):429-452
29. Hogarth S, Sullivan R. 2013. Genes, genes, genes. The Lancet Oncology 14:e88
30. Holliman R. 2004.Media coverage of cloning: a study of media content, production and reception. Public Understanding of Science 13:107-130
31. Homer N, Szelinger S, Redman M, Duggan D, Tembe W,Muehling J, Pearson JV, Stephan DA, Nelson SF, Craig DW. 2008. Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genetics 4:e1000167
32. Joseph JW, Neidich AB, Ober C, Ross LF. 2008. Empirical data about women's attitudes toward a biobank focused on pregnancy outcomes. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 146A:305-311
33. Kaiser J. 2009. Cash-starved deCODE is looking for a rescuer for its biobank. Science 325:1054-1054
34. Kaufman DJ,Murphy-Bollinger J, Scott J, Hudson KL. 2009. Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. The American Journal of Human Genetics 85:643-654
35. Kitzinger J,Williams C. 2005. Forecasting science futures: legitimizing hope and calming fears in the embryo stem cell debate. Social Science & Medicine 61:731-740
36. Knoppers BM, Abdul-Rahman MH. 2008. Biobanks in the literature. In: Elger B, Biller-Andorno N, Mauron A, Capron AM, eds. Ethical issues in governing biobanks: global perspectives. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 13-23.
37. Knoppers BM, Zawati MH, Kirby ES. 2012. Sampling populations of humans across the world: ELSI issues. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics 13:395-413
38. Kreiner T, Irion S. 2013. Whole-genome analysis, stem cell research, and the future of biobanks. Cell Stem Cell 12:513-516
39. Landis JR, Koch GG. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159-174
40. Lemke AA,WolfWA, Hebert-Beirne J, Smith ME. 2010. Public and biobank participant attitudes toward genetic research participation and data sharing. Public Health Genomics 13(6):368-377
41. Louis JC. 2003. Big gene banks: nuggets for drug discovery or fool's gold? Drug Discovery Today 8:100-101
42. Lowrance WW, Collins FS. 2007. Identifiability in genomic research. Science 317:600-602
43. Manolio TA, Bailey-Wilson JE, Collins FS. 2006. Genes, environment and the value of prospective cohort studies. Nature Reviews Genetics 7:812-820
44. Manolio TA,Weis BK, Cowie CC, Hoover RN, Hudson K, Kramer BS, Berg C, Collins R, Ewart W, Gaziano JM, Hirschfeld S,Marcus PM,Masys D,McCarty CA,McLaughlin J, Patel AV, Peakman T, Pedersen NL, Schaefer C, Scott JA, Sprosen T,Walport M, Collins FS. New models for large prospective studies: is there a better way? American Journal of Epidemiology 175:859-866
45. Master Z, Nelson E,Murdoch B, Caulfield T. 2012. Biobanks, consent and claims of consensus. Nature Methods 9:885-888
46. McCarty CA, Nair A, Austin DM, Giampietro PF. 2007. Informed consent and subject motivation to participate in a large, population-based genomics study: the Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project. Community Genetics 10:2-9
47. Nisbet M, Brossard D, Kroepsch A. 2003. Framing science: the stem cell controversy in an age of press/politics. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 8(2):36-70
48. Nisbet MC,Mooney C. 2007. Framing science. Science 316(5821):56
49. Nobile H, Vermeulen E, Thys K, Bergmann MM, Borry P. 2012. Why do participants enroll in population biobank studies? A systematic literature review. Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics 13(1):35-47
50. Palmer LJ. 2007. UK Biobank: bank on it. The Lancet 369:1980-1982
51. Petersen A. 2001. Biofantasies: genetics and medicine in the print news media. Social Science and Medicine 52:1255-1268
52. Petersen A. 2002. Replicating our bodies, losing our selves: news media portrayals of human cloning in the wake of dolly. Body & Society 8(4):71-90
53. Petersen A. 2005. Securing our genetic health: engendering trust in UK Biobank. Sociology of Health & Illness 27(2):271-292
54. Petersen A. 2009. The ethics of expectations: biobanks and the promise of personalised medicine. Monash Bioethics Review 28:22-33
55. Riesch H. 2011. Changing news: re-adjusting science studies to online newspapers. Public Understanding of Science 20(6):771-777
56. Rothstein MA. 2007. Expanding the ethical analysis of biobanks. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 33:89-101
57. Seale C. 2003. Health and media: an overview. Sociology of Health & Illness 25(6):513-531
58. Sinicrope PS, Patten CA, Bonnema SM, Almquist JR, Smith CM, Beebe TJ, Jacobsen SJ, Vachon CM. 2009. Healthy women's motivators and barriers to participation in a breast cancer cohort study: a qualitative study. Annals of Epidemiology 19:484-493
59. Smith GD, Ebrahim S, Lewis S, Hansell AL, Palmer LJ, Burton PR. 2005. Genetic epidemiology and public health: hope, hype, and future prospects. The Lancet 366:1484-1498
60. The Lancet. 2007. Big step for science, small step for medicine. The Lancet 369:1974.
61. The Lancet. 2009. An afternoon at UK Biobank. The Lancet 373:1146.
62. The PEWResearch Center 2011. Internet gains on television as public's main news source. Available at http://onlinepubs.ehclients.com/images/pdf/InternetGainsonTVasPrimaryNews Source-Pew-Jan-2011.pdf (accessed 26 June 2014).
63. Thiel DB, Platt T, Platt J, King SB, Kardia SL. 2014. Community perspectives on public health biobanking: an analysis of community meetings on the Michigan BioTrust for Health. Journal of Community Genetics 5:125-138
64. Tutton R, Kaye J, Hoeyer K. 2004. Governing UK Biobank: the importance of ensuring public trust. Trends in Biotechnology 22:284-285
65. UK Biobank. 2014. About UK Biobank. Available at https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/ about-biobank-uk/ (accessed 26 June 2014).
66. Vaught J, Rogers J, Carolin T, Compton C. 2011. Biobankonomics: developing a sustainable business model approach for the formation of a human tissue biobank. JNCI Monographs 2011:24-31
67. Wallace H. 2002. The need for independent scientific peer review of Biobank UK. The Lancet 359(9325):2282
68. Wallace H. 2003. A UK Biobank: good for public health? Available at http://www.opendemocracy.net/theme9-genes/article 1381.jsp (accessed 26 June 2014).
69. Wallace HM. 2005. The development of UK Biobank: excluding scientific controversy from ethical debate. Critical Public Health 15(4):323-333
70. Wellcome Trust. 2012. Tracking public views on medical research. Available at http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/@mshgrants/documents/webdocument/wtp040713.pdf (accessed 26 June 2014).