Secondary Uses and the Governance of De-Identified Data: Lessons from the Human Genome Diversity Panel [Book Review]
Graduate studies at Western
BMC Medical Ethics 12 (1):16- (2011)
|Abstract||Background: Recent changes to regulatory guidance in the US and Europe have complicated oversight of secondary research by rendering most uses of de-identified data exempt from human subjects oversight. To identify the implications of such guidelines for harms to participants and communities, this paper explores the secondary uses of one de-identified DNA sample collection with limited oversight: the Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP)-Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain, Fondation Jean Dausset (CEPH) Human Genome Diversity Panel. Methods: Using a combination of keyword and cited reference search, we identified English-language scientific articles published between 2002 and 2009 that reported analysis of HGDP Diversity Panel samples and/or data. We then reviewed each article to identify the specific research use to which the samples and/or data was applied. Secondary uses were categorized according to the type and kind of research supported by the collection. Results: A wide variety of secondary uses were identified from 148 peer-reviewed articles. While the vast majority of these uses were consistent with the original intent of the collection, a minority of published reports described research whose primary findings could be regarded as controversial, objectionable, or potentially stigmatizing in their interpretation. Conclusions: We conclude that potential risks to participants and communities cannot be wholly eliminated by anonymization of individual data and suggest that explicit review of proposed secondary uses, by a Data Access Committee or similar internal oversight body with suitable stakeholder representation, should be a required component of the trustworthy governance of any repository of data or specimens|
|Keywords||info:mesh/United States info:mesh/Human Genome Project info:mesh/Guidelines as Topic info:mesh/Europe info:mesh/Humans info:mesh/Genetic Research info:mesh/Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide info:mesh/Confidentiality Humans Confidentiality Genetic Research Human Genome Project Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide Ethics, Research United States Europe Guidelines as Topic info:mesh/Ethics, Research|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Similar books and articles
Emma Smith (2008). Pitfalls and Promises: The Use of Secondary Data Analysis in Educational Research. British Journal of Educational Studies 56 (3):323 - 339.
Christopher J. Cowton (1998). The Use of Secondary Data in Business Ethics Research. Journal of Business Ethics 17 (4):423-434.
Shawn W. Nicholson & Terrence B. Bennett (2009). Transparent Practices: Primary and Secondary Data in Business Ethics Dissertations. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 84 (3):417 - 425.
Robin O. Andreasen & Milo J. Aukerman (2002). The Human Genome Project: A Reply to Rosenberg. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 17 (5):673-678.
Jeremy Sugarman (2010). Reflections on Governance Models for the Clinical Translation of Stem Cells. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 38 (2):251-256.
Heidi E. Keller & Sandra Lee (2003). Ethical Issues Surrounding Human Participants Research Using the Internet. Ethics and Behavior 13 (3):211 – 219.
Howard Harris (2001). Content Analysis of Secondary Data: A Study of Courage in Managerial Decision Making. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 34 (3-4):191 - 208.
Joe Giffels, Sara Vollmer & Stephanie Bird (2010). Editors' Overview: Topics in the Responsible Management of Research Data. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):631-637.
David E. Wright, Sandra L. Titus & Jered B. Cornelison (2008). Mentoring and Research Misconduct: An Analysis of Research Mentoring in Closed Ori Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):323-336.
E. Wright David, L. Titus Sandra & B. Cornelison Jered (2008). MentOring and Research Misconduct: An Analysis of Research mentOring in Closed Ori Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3).
Paul Hilton Micklethwaite, What is Design? : An Empirical Investigation Into Conceptions of Design in the Community of Design Stakeholders.
Paulina Tindana, Susan Bull, Lucas Amenga-Etego, Jantina de Vries, Raymond Aborigo, Kwadwo Koram, Dominic Kwiatkowski & Michael Parker (2012). Seeking Consent to Genetic and Genomic Research in a Rural Ghanaian Setting: A Qualitative Study of the MalariaGEN Experience. [REVIEW] BMC Medical Ethics 13 (1):15-.
P. Allmark (2004). Should Research Samples Reflect the Diversity of the Population? Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (2):185-189.
Kevin Campbell & Antonio Mínguez-Vera (2008). Gender Diversity in the Boardroom and Firm Financial Performance. Journal of Business Ethics 83 (3):435 - 451.
Isabelle Hirtzlin, Christine Dubreuil, Nathalie Préaubert, Jenny Duchier, Brigitte Jansen, Jürgen Simon, Paula Lobatao De Faria, Anna Perez-Lezaun, Bert Visser, Garrath Williams, Anne Cambon-Thomsen & The Eurogenbank Consortium (2003). An Empirical Survey on Biobanking of Human Genetic Material and Data in Six EU Countries. European Journal of Human Genetics 11:475–488.
Added to index2011-09-27
Total downloads3 ( #213,597 of 734,580 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,269 of 734,580 )
How can I increase my downloads?