ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2015
Toward a common language for biobanking.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guidelines for Biobanking of Bone Marrow Adipose Tissue and Related Cell Types: Report of the Biobanking Working Group of the International Bone Marrow Adiposity Society.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Guideline
- Imaging biobanks: operational limits, medical-legal and ethical reflections.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Review
- The biobank of barretos cancer hospital: 14 years of experience in cancer research.Cell and tissue banking · 2022Article
- DICOM-MIABIS integration model for biobanks: a use case of the EU PRIMAGE project.European radiology experimental · 2021Article
- The Scale, Collections, and Biospecimen Distribution of Grade A Tertiary Hospital Biobanks in China: A National Survey.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
- BioSCOOP - Biobank Sample Communication Protocol. New approach for the transfer of information between biobanks.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2019Article
- Aspects of Modern Biobank Activity - Comprehensive Review.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2018Review
- Quantitative mass spectrometry of unconventional human biological matrices.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2016Article
- OOSTT: a Resource for Analyzing the Organizational Structures of Trauma Centers and Trauma Systems.CEUR workshop proceedings · 2016Article
- OBIB-a novel ontology for biobanking.Journal of biomedical semantics · 2016Article
- Biomedical imaging ontologies: A survey and proposal for future work.Journal of pathology informatics · 2015Article
- Biobanks in the era of personalized medicine: objectives, challenges, and innovation: Overview.The EPMA journal · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To encourage the process of harmonization, the biobank community should support and use a common terminology. Relevant terms may be found in general thesauri for medicine, legal instruments or specific glossaries for biobanking. A comparison of the use of these sources has so far not been conducted and would be a useful instrument to further promote harmonization and data sharing. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the preference of definitions important for sharing biological samples and data. Definitions for 10 terms -[human] biobank, sample/specimen, sample collection, study, aliquot, coded, identifying information, anonymised, personal data and informed consent-were collected from several sources. A web-based questionnaire was sent to 560 European individuals working with biobanks asking to select their preferred definition for the terms. A total of 123 people participated in the survey, giving a response rate of 23%. The result was evaluated from four aspects: scope of definitions, potential regional differences, differences in semantics and definitions in the context of ontologies, guided by comments from responders. Indicative from the survey is the risk of focusing only on the research aspect of biobanking in definitions. Hence, it is recommended that important terms should be formulated in such a way that all areas of biobanking are covered to improve the bridges between research and clinical application. Since several of the terms investigated here within can also be found in a legal context, which may differ between countries, establishing what is a proper definition on how it adheres to law is also crucial.
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.