ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2014
Development and validation of the biobanking attitudes and knowledge survey (BANKS).
Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Health Communication Channels for Reaching Hispanics About Biobanking: a Pilot Trial.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2018Trial
- Development and Validation of a Biobank Questionnaire Intended for the Public in the Arab Region.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2021Article
- Knowledge, perceptions and attitude of Egyptian physicians towards biobanking issues.PloS one · 2021Article
- Privacy Concerns About Personal Health Information and Fear of Unintended Use of Biospecimens Impact Donations by African American Patients.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2020Article
- Improving Research Literacy in Diverse Minority Populations with a Novel Communication Tool.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2019Article
- Article
- Assessing Researcher Needs for a Virtual Biobank.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2017Article
- Development and Validation of the Biomedical Research Trust Scale (BRTS) in English and Spanish.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE · 2016Article
- Development and validation of the biobanking attitudes and knowledge survey-Spanish (BANKS-SP).Journal of community genetics · 2016Article
- Giving samples or "getting checked": measuring conflation of observational biospecimen research and clinical care in Latino communities.BMC medical ethics · 2015Article
- Introducing Biospecimen Science to Communities: Tools from Two Cities.Progress in community health partnerships : research, education, and action · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNo validated multiscale instruments exist that measure community members' views on biobanking and biospecimen donation. This study describes the development and psychometric properties of the English-language BANKS (Biobanking Attitudes and Knowledge Survey).
methodsThe BANKS was created by item generation through review of scientific literature, focus groups with community members, and input from a community advisory board. Items were refined through cognitive interviews. Content validity was assessed through an expert panel review. Psychometric properties of the BANKS were assessed in a sample of 85 community members.
resultsThe final BANKS includes three scales: attitudes, knowledge, and self-efficacy; as well as three single items, which evaluated receptivity and intention to donate a biospecimen for research. Cronbach α coefficients for two scales that use Likert response format indicated high internal consistency (attitudes: α, 0.88; self-efficacy: α, 0.95). Content validity indices were moderate, ranging from 0.69 to 0.89. Intention to donate blood and intention to donate urine were positively correlated with attitudes, knowledge, self-efficacy, and receptivity to learning more about biobanking (P values range from 0.029 to <0.001).
conclusionsThe final BANKS shows evidence of satisfactory reliability and validity, is easy to administer, and is a promising tool to inform biospecimen research. Additional studies should be conducted with larger samples considering biospecimen donation to further assess the reliability and validity of the instrument. IMPACT: A valid and reliable instrument measuring community members' views about biobanking may help researchers evaluate relevant communication interventions to enhance understanding, intention, and actual biospecimen donation. A Spanish-language BANKS is under development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.