ArticleBMC cancer2015
Oncology patients overwhelmingly support tissue banking.
Article in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relevance of humanized three-dimensional tumor tissue models: a descriptive systematic literature review.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2020Pooled it
- Research opportunities in precision oncology: perspectives on biospecimen and genomic data sharing from adults with cancer in Ireland.Irish journal of medical science · 2025Article
- Perception of Polish patients with cancer of the ethical and legal issues related to biobank research.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Trust and Support for Cancer Research Biobanks: Insights from Cancer Patients in Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- Article
- Leveraging oncology collaborative networks and biomedical informatics data resources to rapidly recruit and enroll rural residents into oncology quality of life clinical trials.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- Patient Preferences for Use of Archived Biospecimens from Oncology Trials When Adequacy of Informed Consent Is Unclear.The oncologist · 2020Article
- Secondary Use of Patient Tissue in Cancer Biobanks.The oncologist · 2019Article
- Patient, caregiver and physician perspectives on participating in a thoracic rapid tissue donation program.Patient education and counseling · 2018Article
- A population-based approach for implementing change from opt-out to opt-in research permissions.PloS one · 2017Article
- Community recommendations on biobank governance: Results from a deliberative community engagement in California.PloS one · 2017Article
- Biobank attributes associated with higher patient participation: a randomized study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2016Article
- The Perspectives of Haematological Cancer Patients on Tissue Banking.Oncology and therapy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranslational biomedical research relies on the availability of human tissue to explore disease aetiology and prognostic factors, with the objective of developing better targeted treatments. The establishment of biobanks poses ongoing ethical considerations in relation to donors. This is a quantitative study exploring medical oncology patients' preferences for contributing to tissue biobanks.
methodsThe objectives of this study were to explore oncology patients' preferences about tissue banking, including: 1) willingness to donate; 2) factors influencing donation decisions; 3) preferences about the use of donated tissue including permission systems, data linkage, and communication about research findings to donors. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in two tertiary oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients were approached by volunteers to complete a touchscreen survey in waiting rooms or while receiving intravenous therapy. Consenting participants completed demographic questions and received up to 12 previously validated items exploring preferences for donating tissue.
results224 oncology outpatients participated over a ten month period (69.1 % consent rate; 64.4 % completion rate). Most participants were female (54 %), were a mean age of 62 years, and diagnosed with breast (26 %) and bowel (20 %) cancer. Most participants indicated willingness to donate tissue (84 %) and for their sample to be stored for future use (96 %). Participants preferred a blanket consent approach (71 %), samples to be linked to medical records (62 %) and for general results of the research (79 %) to be provided to them. Factors influencing willingness to donate tissue included personal (85 %) or familial health benefits (88 %) and a sense of duty to future patients (82 %).
conclusionsThe overwhelming majority of oncology patients are willing to participate in a tissue bank, providing some support to explore 'opt-out' models of consent. To enhance patient acceptability, tissue banking programs should: (i) consider allowing blanket informed consent as well as opt-in models of consent; (ii) develop protocols allowing feedback of information about samples in line with patient preferences; (iii) provide clear information to potential donors about the benefits arising from donation.
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.