ArticleJournal of bioethical inquiry2014
A role for research ethics committees in exchanges of human biospecimens through material transfer agreements.
Article in Journal of bioethical inquiry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Researchers' perspectives on the use of material transfer agreements in biobanking research; a case of Uganda.BMC medical ethics · 2026Article
- A framework for ethics review of applications to store, reuse and share tissue samples.Monash bioethics review · 2021Article
- Identifying the nature and extent of public and donor concern about the commercialisation of biobanks for genomic research.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2021Article
- Towards Harmonized Biobanking for Biomonitoring: A Comparison of Human Biomonitoring-Related and Clinical Biorepositories.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2020Article
- Australia: regulating genomic data sharing to promote public trust.Human genetics · 2018Review
- Exploring perspectives of research ethics committee members on the governance of big data in sub-Saharan Africa.South African journal of scienceArticle
- Data sharing and data governance in sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives from researchers and scientists engaged in data-intensive research.South African journal of scienceArticle
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
International transfers of human biological material (biospecimens) and data are increasing, and commentators are starting to raise concerns about how donor wishes are protected in such circumstances. These exchanges are generally made under contractual material transfer agreements (MTAs). This paper asks what role, if any, should research ethics committees (RECs) play in ensuring legal and ethical conduct in such exchanges. It is recommended that RECs should play a more active role in the future development of best practice MTAs involving exchange of biospecimens and data and in monitoring compliance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24965440What 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.