Dataset Information

Public Views on Models for Accessing Genomic and Health Data for Research: Mixed Methods Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The literature abounds with increasing numbers of research studies using genomic data in combination with health data (eg, health records and phenotypic and lifestyle data), with great potential for large-scale research and precision medicine. However, concerns have been raised about social acceptability and risks posed for individuals and their kin. Although there has been public engagement on various aspects of this topic, there is a lack of information about public views on data access models.

Objective

This study aimed to address the lack of information on the social acceptability of access models for reusing genomic data collected for research in conjunction with health data. Models considered were open web-based access, released externally to researchers, and access within a data safe haven.

Methods

Views were ascertained using a series of 8 public workshops (N=116). The workshops included an explanation of benefits and risks in using genomic data with health data, a facilitated discussion, and an exit questionnaire. The resulting quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, and the qualitative data were analyzed for emerging themes.

Results

Respondents placed a high value on the reuse of genomic data but raised concerns including data misuse, information governance, and discrimination. They showed a preference for giving consent and use of data within a safe haven over external release or open access. Perceived risks with open access included data being used by unscrupulous parties, with external release included data security, and with safe havens included the need for robust safeguards.

Conclusions

This is the first known study exploring public views of access models for reusing anonymized genomic and health data in research. It indicated that people are generally amenable but prefer data safe havens because of perceived sensitivities. We recommend that public views be incorporated into guidance on models for the reuse of genomic and health data.

SUBMITTER: Jones KH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6727690 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Public Views on Models for Accessing Genomic and Health Data for Research: Mixed Methods Study.

Jones Kerina H KH Daniels Helen H Squires Emma E Ford David V DV

Journal of medical Internet research 20190821 8

<h4>Background</h4>The literature abounds with increasing numbers of research studies using genomic data in combination with health data (eg, health records and phenotypic and lifestyle data), with great potential for large-scale research and precision medicine. However, concerns have been raised about social acceptability and risks posed for individuals and their kin. Although there has been public engagement on various aspects of this topic, there is a lack of information about public views on ...[more]

PMID: 31436163

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveA mixed methods study exploring the UK general public's willingness to donate human biosamples (HBSs) for biomedical research.SettingCross-sectional focus groups followed by an online survey.ParticipantsTwelve focus groups (81 participants) selectively sampled to reflect a range of demographic groups; 1110 survey responders recruited through a stratified sampling method with quotas set on sex, age, geographical location, socioeconomic group and ethnicity.Main outcome measures(1) Identify participants' willingness to donate HBSs for biomedical research, (2) explore acceptability towards donating different types of HBSs in various settings and (3) explore preferences regarding use and access to HBSs.Results87% of survey participants thought donation of HBSs was important and 75% wanted to be asked to donate in general. Responders who self-reported having some or good knowledge of the medical research process were significantly more likely to want to donate (p<0.001). Reasons why focus group participants saw donation as important included: it was a good way of reciprocating for the medical treatment received; it was an important way of developing drugs and treatments; residual tissue would otherwise go to waste and they or their family members might benefit. The most controversial types of HBSs to donate included: brain post mortem (29% would donate), eyes post mortem (35%), embryos (44%), spare eggs (48%) and sperm (58%). Regarding the use of samples, there were concerns over animal research (34%), research conducted outside the UK (35%), and research conducted by pharmaceutical companies (56%), although education and discussion were found to alleviate such concerns.ConclusionsThere is a high level of public support and willingness to donate HBSs for biomedical research. Underlying concerns exist regarding the use of certain types of HBSs and conditions under which they are used. Improved education and more controlled forms of consent for sensitive samples may mitigate such concerns.

Project description:China is engaged in promoting community health services (CHS) nationwide. This study examines the public's views towards CHS and their utilisation of community-based and hospital-based outpatient services.A mixed methods study using qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey.The study was conducted among the public between September 2014 and September 2015 in Zhejiang province, China. Six focus groups and 13 individuals were interviewed. The questionnaire was completed by 1248 respondents (response rate: 83%).Utilisation of community-based and hospital-based outpatient services.Functions of CHS perceived by the public included provision of minor illness management, coordination, drug dispensing, follow-up care and patient education. However, many also showed a distrust in primary care providers' (PCPs) competence for confirming the initial diagnosis and management plan. As coordinators, PCPs' integrity was challenged, and PCPs were thought to be potential 'tuo er' (cunning agents who tried to lead patients to some notorious hospitals to make money). Survey results showed that 800 (64.1%) respondents visited hospital-based clinics and 688 (55.1%) visited CHS at least once in the past year. Compared with the uninsured group, those covered by Urban Resident Medical Insurance (adjusted OR (AOR)=1.95, 95%?CI 1.24 to 3.07) and Urban Employee Medical Insurance (AOR=2.59, 95%?CI 1.59 to 4.24) were more likely to use hospital-based services. Respondents who had a chronic condition were more likely than their counterparts to use both hospital-based services (AOR=1.72, 95%?CI 1.18 to 2.49) and CHS (AOR=1.66, 95%?CI 1.19 to 2.32). Income levels were positively associated with the likelihood of visiting hospital-based clinics (AOR=1.67, 95%?CI 1.15 to 2.42) but negatively associated with the likelihood of using CHS (AOR=0.68, 95%?CI 0.48 to 0.96).Demand of hospital-based outpatient services is much higher than the community-based outpatient services. Policy reformers need to take further actions to address the public distrust in PCPs to facilitate their gatekeeping role.

Project description:BackgroundBuilding health research capacity in low- and middle-income countries is essential to achieving universal access to safe, high-quality healthcare. It can enable healthcare workers to conduct locally relevant research and apply findings to strengthen their health delivery systems. However, lack of funding, experience, know-how, and weak research infrastructures hinders their ability. Understanding research capacity, engagement, and contextual factors that either promote or obstruct research efforts by healthcare workers can inform national strategies aimed at building research capacity.MethodsWe used a convergent mixed-methods study design to understand research capacity and research engagement of healthcare workers in Tanzania's public health system, including the barriers, motivators, and facilitators to conducting research. Our sample included 462 randomly selected healthcare workers from 45 facilities. We conducted surveys and interviews to capture data in five categories: (1) healthcare workers research capacity; (2) research engagement; (3) barriers, motivators, and facilitators; (4) interest in conducting research; and (5) institutional research capacity. We assessed quantitative and qualitative data using frequency and thematic analysis, respectively; we merged the data to identify recurring and unifying concepts.ResultsRespondents reported low experience and confidence in quantitative (34% and 28.7%, respectively) and qualitative research methods (34.5% and 19.6%, respectively). Less than half (44%) of healthcare workers engaged in research. Engagement in research was positively associated with: working at a District Hospital or above (p = 0.006), having a university degree or more (p = 0.007), and previous research experience (p = 0.001); it was negatively associated with female sex (p = 0.033). Barriers to conducting research included lack of research funding, time, skills, opportunities to practice, and research infrastructure. Motivators and facilitators included a desire to address health problems, professional development, and local and international collaborations. Almost all healthcare workers (92%) indicated interest in building their research capacity.ConclusionIndividual and institutional research capacity and engagement among healthcare workers in Tanzania is low, despite high interest for capacity building. We propose a fourfold pathway for building research capacity in Tanzania through (1) high-quality research training and mentorship; (2) strengthening research infrastructure, funding, and coordination; (3) implementing policies and strategies that stimulate engagement; and (4) strengthening local and international collaborations.

Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing recognition of the importance of sharing research data within the international scientific community, but also of the ethical and social challenges this presents, particularly in the context of structural inequities and varied capacity in international research. Public involvement is essential to building locally responsive research policies, including on data sharing, but little research has involved stakeholders from low-to-middle income countries.MethodsBetween January and June 2014, a qualitative study was conducted in Kenya involving sixty stakeholders with varying experiences of research in a deliberative process to explore views on benefits and challenges in research data sharing. In-depth interviews and extended small group discussions based on information sharing and facilitated debate were used to collect data. Data were analysed using Framework Analysis, and charting flow and dynamics in debates.FindingsThe findings highlight both the opportunities and challenges of communicating about this complex and relatively novel topic for many stakeholders. For more and less research-experienced stakeholders, ethical research data sharing is likely to rest on the development and implementation of appropriate trust-building processes, linked to local perceptions of benefits and challenges. The central nature of trust is underpinned by uncertainties around who might request what data, for what purpose and when. Key benefits perceived in this consultation were concerned with the promotion of public health through science, with legitimate beneficiaries defined differently by different groups. Important challenges were risks to the interests of study participants, communities and originating researchers through stigmatisation, loss of privacy, impacting autonomy and unfair competition, including through forms of intentional and unintentional 'misuse' of data. Risks were also seen for science.DiscussionGiven background structural inequities in much international research, building trust in this low-to-middle income setting includes ensuring that the interests of study participants, primary communities and originating researchers will be promoted as far as possible, as well as protected. Important ways of building trust in data sharing include involving the public in policy development and implementation, promoting scientific collaborations around data sharing and building close partnerships between researchers and government health authorities to provide checks and balances on data sharing, and promote near and long-term translational benefits.

Dataset Information

Public Views on Models for Accessing Genomic and Health Data for Research: Mixed Methods Study.

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Public Views on Models for Accessing Genomic and Health Data for Research: Mixed Methods Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets