Donors to biobanks are typically asked to give blanket consent, allowing their donation to be used in any research authorized by the biobank. This type of consent ignores the evidence that some donors have moral, religious, or cultural concerns about the future uses of their donations – concerns we call “non-welfare interests”. The nature of non-welfare interests and their effect on willingness to donate to a biobank is not well understood. In order to better undersand the influence of non-welfare interests, we surveyed a national sample of the US population using a probability-based internet panel. Logistic regression models assessed the demographic and attitudinal characteristics associated with participants’ willingness to give consent for unspecified future uses of their donation when presented with 7 research scenarios that raised possible non-welfare interest concerns. Most people had non-welfare interests that significantly affect their willingness to donate to a biobank using blanket consent. Some non-welfare interests are associated with subgroups but others are not. A positive attitude toward biomedical research in general was associated with increased willingness to donate, while concerns about privacy and being African American were associated with decreased willingness. Non-welfare interests matter and can diminish willingness to donate to a biobank. Our data suggest that trust in research promotes willingness to donate. Ignoring non-welfare interests could erode this trust. Donors’ non-welfare interests could be accommodated through greater transparency and easier access to information about the uses of donations.
Keywords Biobank   Biobank donors   Bioethics   Blanket consent   Moral concerns   Non-welfare interests   Research attitudes questionnaire   Willingness to donate
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1186/s40504-016-0036-4
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 69,018
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Voices Missing From the Autonomy Discourse.Julia D. Gibson - 2019 - International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics 12 (1):77-98.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Biobanks--When is Re-Consent Necessary?K. S. Steinsbekk & B. Solberg - 2011 - Public Health Ethics 4 (3):236-250.
Biobank Research and the Right to Privacy.Lars Øystein Ursin - 2008 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 29 (4):267-285.
Combining Efficiency and Concerns About Integrity When Using Human Biobanks.Mats G. Hansson - 2006 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 37 (3):520-532.
Broadening Consent--And Diluting Ethics?B. Hofmann - 2009 - Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (2):125-129.
Building on Relationships of Trust in Biobank Research.M. G. Hansson - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (7):415-418.


Added to PP index

Total views
24 ( #470,645 of 2,498,423 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #212,099 of 2,498,423 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes