Current practice of public involvement activities in biomedical research and innovation: A systematic qualitative review

PLoS ONE

Volumn 9, Issue 12, 2014, Pages

  Lander, Jonas ^a   Hainz, Tobias ^a   Hirschberg, Irene ^a   Strech, Daniel ^a  

^a HANNOVER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOINFORMATICS; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DATA EXTRACTION; ELECTRONIC DATA INTERCHANGE; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES; PUBLIC RELATIONS; PUBLICATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL PARTICIPATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THEMATIC ANALYSIS; TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH; CONSUMER; ETHICS; PUBLIC OPINION;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; HUMANS; PUBLIC OPINION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EID: 84915818921     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113274     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. Time Magazine (2009) 10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now. Time Magazine. New York: Time Inc.
2. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2012) Emerging biotechnologies: technology, choice and the public good. Nuffield Council on Bioethics. 978-1-904384-27-4 978-1-904384-27-4.
3. O'Doherty KC, Burgess MM (2009) Engaging the public on biobanks: outcomes of the BC biobank deliberation. Public Health Genomics 12:203-215.
4. O'Doherty KC, Hawkins A (2010) Structuring public engagement for effective input in policy development on human tissue biobanking. Public Health Genomics 13:197-206.
5. Avard D, Bucci L, Burgess M, Kaye J, Heeney C, et al. (2009) Public Health Genomics (PHG) and Public Participation: Points to Consider. Journal of Public Deliberation 5.
6. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2001) Citizens as Partners. Information, Consultation and Public Participation in Policy-Making.
7. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2012) Planning Guide for Public Engagement and Outreach in Nanotechnology.
8. European Commission (2012) Biobanks for Europe. A Challenge for Governance.
9. Involve (2012) Making a Difference: A guide to evaluating public participation in central government.
10. RAND Europe (2010) Involving the public in healthcare policy. An update of the research evidence and proposed evaluation framework.
11. European Institute for Public Participation (2009) Public Participation in Europe. An international perspective.
12. International Association for Public Participation (2007) IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation.
13. Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Smith P, Martin E, et al. (2003) Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Soc Sci Med 57:239-251.
14. Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2005) A Typology of Public Engagement Mechanisms. Science, Technology & Human Values 30:251-290.
15. Abelson J, Blacksher E, Li K, Boesveld S, Goold S (2013) Public Deliberation in Health Policy and Bioethics: Mapping an emerging, interdisciplinary field. Journal of Public Deliberation 9.
16. Conklin A, Morris Z, Nolte E (2012) What is the evidence base for public involvement in health-care policy?: results of a systematic scoping review. Health Expect.
17. De Vries R, Stanczyk AE, Ryan KA, Kim SY (2011) A framework for assessing the quality of democratic deliberation: enhancing deliberation as a tool for bioethics. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 6:3-17.
18. Moran R, Davidson P (2011) An uneven spread: a review of public involvement in the National Institute of Health Research's Health Technology Assessment program. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 27:343-347.
19. Boote J, Baird W, Beecroft C (2010) Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: a narrative review of case examples. Health Policy 95:10-23.
20. Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2004) Evaluating Public-Participation Exercises: A Research Agenda. Science, Technology & Human Values 29:512-556.
21. Avard D, Grégoire G, Jean M (2008) Involving the Public in Public Health Genomics. A review of guidelines and policy statements. Gen Edit 6:1-9.
22. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A (2005) Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods.
23. Rowe G, Frewer LJ (2000) Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation. Science, Technology & Human Values 25:3-29.
24. Nanz P, Fritsche M (2012) Handbuch Bü rgerbeteiligung. Verfahren und Akteure, Chancen und Grenzen.
25. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (2005) Evaluating Public Participation in Policy Making.
26. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2008) Public Participation Guide. A guide for meaningful public participation in environmental assessments under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Ottawa.
27. Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2008) Public Participation Guide. A guide for meaningful public participation in environmental assessments under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.
28. Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, Le Roy L, et al. (2008) Public expectations for return of results from large-cohort genetic research. Am J Bioeth 8:36-43.
29. Molster C, Maxwell S, Youngs L, Kyne G, Hope F, et al. (2013) Blueprint for a deliberative public forum on biobanking policy: were theoretical principles achievable in practice? Health Expect 16:211-224.
30. Molster C, Maxwell S, Youngs L, Potts A, Kyne G, et al. (2012) An Australian approach to the policy translation of deliberated citizen perspectives on biobanking. Public Health Genomics 15:82-91.
31. Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, Le Roy L, et al. (2009) Public perspectives on informed consent for biobanking. Am J Public Health 99:2128-2134.
32. O'Doherty KC, Hawkins AK, Burgess MM (2012) Involving citizens in the ethics of biobank research: informing institutional policy through structured public deliberation. Soc Sci Med 75:1604-1611.
33. Molyneux CS, Wassenaar DR, Peshu N, Marsh K (2005) 'Even if they ask you to stand by a tree all day, you will have to do it (laughter) ⋯!': community voices on the notion and practice of informed consent for biomedical research in developing countries. Soc Sci Med 61:443-454.
34. Gradinger F, Britten N, Wyatt K, Froggatt K, Gibson A, et al. (2013) Values associated with public involvement in health and social care research: a narrative review. Health Expect.
35. Goodin RE, Dryzek JS (2006) Deliberative Impacts: The Macro-Political Uptake of Mini-Publics. Politics & Society 34:219-244.
36. Haddow G, Cunningham-Burley S, Bruce A, Parry S (2008) Generation Scotland: consulting publics and specialists at an early stage in a genetic database's development. Critical Public Health 18:139-149.
37. Shippee ND, Domecq Garces JP, Prutsky Lopez GJ, Wang Z, Elraiyah TA, et al. (2013) Patient and service user engagement in research: a systematic review and synthesized framework. Health Expect.
38. Abelson J, Forest PG, Eyles J, Casebeer A, Martin E, et al. (2007) Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: results from a Canadian comparative study. Soc Sci Med 64:2115-2128.
39. Kerath SM, Klein G, Kern M, Shapira I, Witthuhn J, et al. (2013) Beliefs and attitudes towards participating in genetic research - a population based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 13:114.
40. Miller FA, Mentzakis E, Axler R, Lehoux P, French M, et al. (2013) Do canadian researchers and the lay public prioritize biomedical research outcomes equally? A choice experiment. Acad Med 88:519-526.
41. Ulrich A, Thompson B, Livaudais JC, Espinoza N, Cordova A, et al. (2013) Issues in biomedical research: what do Hispanics think? Am J Health Behav 37:80-85.
42. Halverson CM, Ross LF (2012) Attitudes of African-American parents about biobank participation and return of results for themselves and their children. J Med Ethics 38:561-566.
43. Isler MR, Sutton K, Cadigan RJ, Corbie-Smith G (2013) Community perceptions of genomic research: implications for addressing health disparities. N C Med J 74:470-476.
44. Ahram M, Othman A, Shahrouri M (2013) Public support and consent preference for biomedical research and biobanking in Jordan. Eur J Hum Genet 21:567-570.
45. Botkin JR, Rothwell E, Anderson R, Stark L, Goldenberg A, et al. (2012) Public attitudes regarding the use of residual newborn screening specimens for research. Pediatrics 129:231-238.
46. Pullman D, Etchegary H, Gallagher K, Hodgkinson K, Keough M, et al. (2011) Personal privacy, public benefits, and biobanks: A conjoint analysis of policy priorities and public perceptions. Genet Med.
47. O'Daniel JM, Rosanbalm KD, Boles L, Tindall GM, Livingston TM, et al. (2012) Enhancing geneticists' perspectives of the public through community engagement. Genet Med 14:243-249.
48. Kronberger N, Holtz P, Wagner W (2012) Consequences of media information uptake and deliberation: focus groups' symbolic coping with synthetic biology. Public Underst Sci 21:174-187.
49. Rothwell E, Anderson R, Goldenberg A, Lewis MH, Stark L, et al. (2012) Assessing public attitudes on the retention and use of residual newborn screening blood samples: a focus group study. Soc Sci Med 74:1305-1309.
50. Nicol D, Critchley C (2012) Benefit sharing and biobanking in Australia. Public Underst Sci 21:534-555.
51. Melas PA, Sjoholm LK, Forsner T, Edhborg M, Juth N, et al. (2010) Examining the public refusal to consent to DNA biobanking: empirical data from a Swedish population-based study. J Med Ethics 36:93-98.
52. Al-Qadire MM, Hammami MM, Abdulhameed HM, Al Gaai EA (2010) Saudi views on consenting for research on medical records and leftover tissue samples. BMC Med Ethics 11:18.
53. Abou-Zeid A, Silverman H, Shehata M, Shams M, Elshabrawy M, et al. (2010) Collection, storage and use of blood samples for future research: views of Egyptian patients expressed in a cross-sectional survey. J Med Ethics 36:539-547.
54. Sturgis P, Brunton-Smith I, Fife-Schaw C (2010) Public attitudes to genomic science: an experiment in information provision. Public Underst Sci 19:166-180.
55. Tupasela A, Sihvo S, Snell K, Jallinoja P, Aro AR, et al. (2010) Attitudes towards biomedical use of tissue sample collections, consent, and biobanks among Finns. Scand J Public Health 38:46-52.
56. Goldenberg AJ, Hull SC, Botkin JR, Wilfond BS (2009) Pediatric biobanks: approaching informed consent for continuing research after children grow up. J Pediatr 155:578-583.
57. Godard B, Ozdemir V, Fortin M, Egalite N (2010) Ethnocultural community leaders' views and perceptions on biobanks and population specific genomic research: a qualitative research study. Public Underst Sci 19:469-485.
58. Kobayashi E, Sakurada T, Ueda S, Satoh N (2011) Public involvement in pharmacogenomics research: a national survey on patients' attitudes towards pharmacogenomics research and the willingness to donate DNA samples to a DNA bank in Japan. Cell Tissue Bank 12:71-80.
59. Gollust SE, Gordon ES, Zayac C, Griffin G, Christman MF, et al. (2012) Motivations and perceptions of early adopters of personalized genomics: perspectives from research participants. Public Health Genomics 15:22-30.
60. Mfutso-Bengo J, Masiye F, Molyneux M, Ndebele P, Chilungo A (2008) Why do people refuse to take part in biomedical research studies? Evidence from a resource-poor area. Malawi Med J 20:57-63.
61. Katz RV, Green BL, Kressin NR, Claudio C, Wang MQ, et al. (2007) Willingness of minorities to participate in biomedical studies: confirmatory findings from a follow-up study using the Tuskegee Legacy Project Questionnaire. J Natl Med Assoc 99:1052-1060.
62. Shepherd R, Barnett J, Cooper H, Coyle A, Moran-Ellis J, et al. (2007) Towards an understanding of British public attitudes concerning human cloning. Soc Sci Med 65:377-392.
63. Godard B, Marshall J, Laberge C (2007) Community engagement in genetic research: results of the first public consultation for the Quebec CARTaGENE project. Community Genet 10:147-158.
64. Roberts LW, Warner TD, Geppert CM, Rogers M, Green Hammond KA (2005) Employees' perspectives on ethically important aspects of genetic research participation: a pilot study. Compr Psychiatry 46:27-33.
65. Bates BR, Harris TM (2004) The Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis and public perceptions of biomedical research: a focus group study. J Natl Med Assoc 96:1051-1064.
66. Bates BR, Lynch JA, Bevan JL, Condit CM (2005) Warranted concerns, warranted outlooks: a focus group study of public understandings of genetic research. Soc Sci Med 60:331-344.
67. Wong ML, Chia KS, Wee S, Chia SE, Lee J, et al. (2004) Concerns over participation in genetic research among Malay-Muslims, Chinese and Indians in Singapore: a focus group study. Community Genet 7:44-54.
68. Bernhardt BA, Tambor ES, Fraser G, Wissow LS, Geller G (2003) Parents' and children's attitudes toward the enrollment of minors in genetic susceptibility research: implications for informed consent. Am J Med Genet A 116 a: 315-323.
69. Berth H, Dinkel A, Balck F (2002) Health through gene tests? Acceptance of and concerns about genetic testing in a German representative sample. Zeitschrift fü r Gesundheitspsychologie 10:97-107.
70. Marsh V, Kombe F, Fitzpatrick R, Molyneux S, Parker M (2013) Managing misaligned paternity findings in research including sickle cell disease screening in Kenya: 'consulting communities' to inform policy. Soc Sci Med 96:192-199.
71. Bombard Y, Miller FA, Hayeems RZ, Carroll JC, Avard D, et al. (2012) Citizens' values regarding research with stored samples from newborn screening in Canada. Pediatrics 129:239-247.
72. Terry SF, Christensen KD, Metosky S, Rudofsky G, Deignan KP, et al. (2012) Community engagement about genetic variation research. Popul Health Manag 15:78-89.
73. Menon D, Stafinski T (2008) Engaging the public in priority-setting for health technology assessment: findings from a citizens' jury. Health Expect 11:282-293.
74. Secko DM, Preto N, Niemeyer S, Burgess MM (2009) Informed consent in biobank research: a deliberative approach to the debate. Soc Sci Med 68:781-789.
75. Nisselle A, Forbes R, Bankier A, Hughes E, Aitken M (2008) Consumer contribution to the delivery of genetic health services. Am J Med Genet A 146 a: 2266-2274.
76. McCarty CA, Chapman-Stone D, Derfus T, Giampietro PF, Fost N (2008) Community consultation and communication for a population-based DNA biobank: the Marshfield clinic personalized medicine research project. Am J Med Genet A 146 A: 3026-3033.
77. Schulz A, Caldwell C, Foster S (2003) "What are they going to do with the information?" Latino/Latina and African American perspectives on the Human Genome Project. Health Educ Behav 30:151-169.