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
- PMID: 17454918
- DOI: 10.1080/14034940600868572
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
Abstract
Aims: To assess the Swedish public's preferences for information and consent procedures when being asked for permission to use previously collected tissue samples for new research studies.
Methods: Cross-sectional study employing postal questionnaires to a random sample of the Swedish general public (n = 6,000) in October 2002-February 2003. The response rate was 49% (n = 2,928). This paper includes only respondents who reportedly would approve of samples being taken and stored (n = 2,122).
Results: When potential tissue sample donors in the general public have to strike a balance between the values at stake, i.e. the autonomy of the donor versus the research value, most (72%) prefer general consent, i.e. where consent is asked for at the outset only. They want the research ethics committee (REC) alone to decide on the use of stored samples, and they would allow storage as long as the sample is useful for research. The minority of respondents who were in favour of specific consent were more likely to be young, well educated, have negative experiences of healthcare and low trust in healthcare authorities.
Conclusions: The majority of the Swedish general public prefer general consent, and are thus willing to delegate some decisions to the RECs. However, preferences for information and consent procedures depend on the context, e.g. the risks for the donor and the purpose of the research. If feasible, procedures should be differentiated according to the preferences of individual donors, thus protecting the interests of both the minority and the majority.
Similar articles
-
Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think?Eur J Public Health. 2006 Aug;16(4):433-40. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cki198. Epub 2005 Oct 5. Eur J Public Health. 2006. PMID: 16207726
-
Informed consent and biobanks: a population-based study of attitudes towards tissue donation for genetic research.Scand J Public Health. 2004;32(3):224-9. doi: 10.1080/14034940310019506. Scand J Public Health. 2004. PMID: 15204184
-
The ethics of research using biobanks: reason to question the importance attributed to informed consent.Arch Intern Med. 2005 Jan 10;165(1):97-100. doi: 10.1001/archinte.165.1.97. Arch Intern Med. 2005. PMID: 15642883
-
Consent in crisis: the need to reconceptualize consent to tissue banking research.Intern Med J. 2006 Feb;36(2):124-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-5994.2006.01020.x. Intern Med J. 2006. PMID: 16472266 Review.
-
Ethical issues in the collection, storage, and research use of human biological materials.J Lab Clin Med. 2004 Nov;144(5):229-34; discussion 226. doi: 10.1016/j.lab.2004.08.003. J Lab Clin Med. 2004. PMID: 15570240 Review.
Cited by
-
Biobanking in Israel 2016-17; expressed perceptions versus real life enrollment.BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Nov 17;18(1):63. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0223-8. BMC Med Ethics. 2017. PMID: 29149849 Free PMC article.
-
Public Attitudes toward Biobanking of Human Biological Material for Research Purposes: A Literature Review.Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jun 21;16(12):2209. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16122209. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019. PMID: 31234457 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Ethical aspects of human biobanks: a systematic review.Croat Med J. 2011 Jun;52(3):262-79. doi: 10.3325/cmj.2011.52.262. Croat Med J. 2011. PMID: 21674823 Free PMC article.
-
Stakeholders' perspectives on biobank-based genomic research: systematic review of the literature.Eur J Hum Genet. 2015 Dec;23(12):1607-14. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.27. Epub 2015 Mar 4. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015. PMID: 25735479 Free PMC article.
-
Indian Council of Medical Research's National Ethical Guidelines for biomedical and health research involving human participants: The way forward from 2006 to 2017.Perspect Clin Res. 2019 Jul-Sep;10(3):108-114. doi: 10.4103/picr.PICR_10_18. Perspect Clin Res. 2019. PMID: 31404208 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical