Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011;14(6):319-24.
doi: 10.1159/000324705. Epub 2011 Mar 24.

Public perspectives regarding data-sharing practices in genomics research

Affiliations

Public perspectives regarding data-sharing practices in genomics research

S B Haga et al. Public Health Genomics. 2011.

Abstract

Background: Genomics research data are often widely shared through a variety of mechanisms including publication, meetings and online databases. Re-identification of research participants from sequence data has been shown possible, raising concerns of participants' privacy.

Methods: In 2008-09, we convened 10 focus groups in Durham, N.C. to explore attitudes about how genomic research data were shared amongst the research community, communication of these practices to participants and how different policies might influence participants' likelihood to consent to a genetic/genomic study. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcripts were complemented by a short anonymous survey. Of 100 participants, 73% were female and 76% African-American, with a median age of 40-49 years.

Results: Overall, we found that discussants expressed concerns about privacy and confidentially of data shared through online databases. Although discussants recognized the benefits of data-sharing, they believed it was important to inform research participants of a study's data-sharing plans during the informed consent process. Discussants were significantly more likely to participate in a study that planned to deposit data in a restricted access online database compared to an open access database (p < 0.00001).

Conclusions: The combination of the potential loss of privacy with concerns about data access and identity of the research sponsor warrants disclosure about a study's data-sharing plans during the informed consent process.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Homer N, Szelinger S, Redman M, Duggan D, Tembe W, Muehling J, Pearson JV, Stephan DA, Nelson SF, Craig DW. Resolving individuals contributing trace amounts of DNA to highly complex mixtures using high-density SNP genotyping microarrays. PLoS Genet. 2008;4:e1000167. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lin Z, Owen AB, Altman RB. Genetics. Genomic research and human subject privacy. Science. 2004;305:183. - PubMed
    1. McGuire AL, Gibbs RA. Genetics. No longer de-identified. Science. 2006;312:370–371. - PubMed
    1. Church G, Heeney C, Hawkins N, de Vries J, Boddington P, Kaye J, Bobrow M, Weir B. Public access to genome-wide data: five views on balancing research with privacy and protection. PLoS Genet. 2009;5:e1000665. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lowrance WW, Collins FS. Ethics. Identifiability in genomic research. Science. 2007;317:600–602. - PubMed

Publication types