Toward a common language for biobanking

Abstract

To encourage the process of harmonization, the biobank community should support and use a common terminology. Relevant terms may be found in general thesauri for medicine, legal instruments or specific glossaries for biobanking. A comparison of the use of these sources has so far not been conducted and would be a useful instrument to further promote harmonization and data sharing. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the preference of definitions important for sharing biological samples and data. Definitions for 10 terms -[human] biobank, sample/specimen, sample collection, study, aliquot, coded, identifying information, anonymised, personal data and informed consent-were collected from several sources. A web-based questionnaire was sent to 560 European individuals working with biobanks asking to select their preferred definition for the terms. A total of 123 people participated in the survey, giving a response rate of 23%. The result was evaluated from four aspects: scope of definitions, potential regional differences, differences in semantics and definitions in the context of ontologies, guided by comments from responders. Indicative from the survey is the risk of focusing only on the research aspect of biobanking in definitions. Hence, it is recommended that important terms should be formulated in such a way that all areas of biobanking are covered to improve the bridges between research and clinical application. Since several of the terms investigated here within can also be found in a legal context, which may differ between countries, establishing what is a proper definition on how it adheres to law is also crucial.

Figure 1

Type of biobank affiliated with responders from the European group using the classification of clinical and population-based biobanks according to the Catalog of European Biobanks, with the addition of responders who are affiliated to a biobank network instead of a specific biobank.

Figure 2

Country of biobank for European responders (dark grey bars with numerical labels) compared with the number of invited participants (light grey bars without labels).