“My Blood, You Know, My Biology Being out There…”: Consent and Participant Control of Biological Samples

Author:

Passmore Susan Racine1ORCID,Gerbitz Abigail1,Hancock Gregory R.2,Evans Laura3ORCID,Green-Harris Gina45,Edwards Dorothy Farrar156,Jackson Tyson1,Thomas Stephen B.78

Affiliation:

1. School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

2. Department of Human Development and Quantitative Methodology, College of Education, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

3. Human Development and Family Studies, School of Human Ecology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

4. Center for Community Engagement and Health Partnerships, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

5. Department of Medicine, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA

6. Department of Kinesiology, School of Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison, USA

7. Center for Health Equity, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

8. Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

Abstract

The widespread and persistent underrepresentation of groups experiencing health disparities in research involving biospecimens is a barrier to scientific knowledge and advances in health equity. To ensure that all groups have the opportunity to participate in research and feel welcome and safe doing so, we must understand how research studies may be shaped to promote inclusion. In this study, we explored the decision to participate in hypothetical research scenarios among African American adults (n = 169) that varied on the basis of four attributes (form of consent, reason for research, institutional affiliation and race of the researcher). Findings indicate that participants were largely willing to contribute to biobanks but significantly preferred opportunities where they had control over the use of their biological samples through tiered or study-specific forms of consent. Broad consent procedures, although common and perhaps preferred by participants with high trust in researchers, may amount to an exclusionary practice.

Funder

National Human Genome Research Institute

National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Communication,Education,Social Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3