ArticleBiopreservation and biobanking2014
A data standard for sourcing fit-for-purpose biological samples in an integrated virtual network of biobanks.
Article in Biopreservation and biobanking, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Development of the Biobank Collections Valuator as an Automated Tool to Determine the Noneconomic Value of Sample Collections.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2026Article
- Radiotherapy biobanking: current landscape, opportunities, challenges, and future aspirations.The journal of pathology. Clinical research · 2022Review
- The Barriers and Motivators to Using Human Tissues for Research: The Views of UK-Based Biomedical Researchers.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2020Article
- Driving innovation through collaboration: development of clinical annotation datasets for brain cancer biobanking.Neuro-oncology practice · 2020Article
- The Belgian Virtual Tumorbank: A Tool for Translational Cancer Research.Frontiers in medicine · 2019Article
- Assessing Researcher Needs for a Virtual Biobank.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2017Article
- The Human Physiome: how standards, software and innovative service infrastructures are providing the building blocks to make it achievable.Interface focus · 2016Review
- The Informatics Challenges Facing Biobanks: A Perspective from a United Kingdom Biobanking Network.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2015Article
- Spanning the genomics era: the vital role of a single institution biorepository for childhood cancer research over a decade.Translational pediatrics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human tissue biobanks are at the epicenter of clinical research, responsible for providing both clinical samples and annotated data. There is a need for large numbers of samples to provide statistical power to research studies, especially since treatment and diagnosis are becoming ever more personalized. A single biobank cannot provide sufficient numbers of samples to capture the full spectrum of any disease. Currently there is no infrastructure in the United Kingdom (UK) to integrate biobanks. Therefore the National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Confederation of Cancer Biobanks (CCB) Working Group 3 looked to establish a data standard to enable biobanks to communicate about the samples they hold and so facilitate the formation of an integrated national network of biobanks. The Working Group examined the existing data standards available to biobanks, such as the MIABIS standard, and compared these to the aims of the working group. The CCB-developed data standard has brought many improvements: (1) Where existing data standards have been developed, these have been incorporated, ensuring compatibility with other initiatives; (2) the standard was written with the expectation that it will be extended for specific disease areas, such as the Breast Cancer Campaign Tissue Bank (BCCTB) and the Strategic Tissue Repository Alliances Through Unified Methods (STRATUM) project; and (3) biobanks will be able to communicate about specific samples, as well as aggregated statistics. The development of this data standard will allow all biobanks to integrate and share information about the samples they hold, facilitating the possibility of a national portal for researchers to find suitable samples for research. In addition, the data standard will allow other clinical services, such as disease registries, to communicate with biobanks in a standardized format allowing for greater cross-discipline data sharing.
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.