Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26226006›Full record

ArticleJournal of personalized medicine2015

Prioritizing Approaches to Engage Community Members and Build Trust in Biobanks: A Survey of Attitudes and Opinions of Adults within Outpatient Practices at the University of Maryland.

Casey Lynnette Overby, Kristin A Maloney, Tameka DeShawn Alestock, Justin Chavez, David Berman, Reem Maged Sharaf, Tom Fitzgerald, Eun-Young Kim, Kathleen Palmer, Alan R Shuldiner and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of personalized medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Associations between the Willingness to Donate Samples to Biobanks and Selected Psychological Variables.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Public Attitudes toward Biobanking of Human Biological Material for Research Purposes: A Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Review
  10. Informed Consent in Translational Genomics: Insufficient Without Trustworthy Governance.The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The significant impact of education, poverty, and race on Internet-based research participant engagement.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Casey Lynnette OverbyProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. coverby@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Kristin A MaloneyProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. kmaloney1@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Tameka DeShawn AlestockProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. talestoc@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Justin ChavezProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. juscha1@umbc.edu.
David BermanProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. david.berman@kcl.ac.uk.
Reem Maged SharafProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. rsharaf@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Tom FitzgeraldProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. tfitzger@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Eun-Young KimProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. eykim@inje.ac.kr.
Kathleen PalmerProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. kpalmer@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Alan R ShuldinerProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. ashuldin@medicine.umaryland.edu.
Braxton D MitchellProgram in Personalized & Genomic Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA. bmitchel@medicine.umaryland.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAchieving high participation of communities representative of all sub-populations is needed in order to ensure broad applicability of biobank study findings. This study aimed to understand potentially mutable attitudes and opinions commonly correlated with biobank participation in order to inform approaches to promote participation in biobanks.

methodsAdults from two University of Maryland (UMD) Faculty Physicians, Inc. outpatient practices were invited to watch a video and complete a survey about a new biobank initiative. We used: Chi-square to assess the relationship between willingness to join the biobank and participant characteristics, other potentially mutable attitudes and opinions, and trust in the UMD. We also used t-test to assess the relationship with trust in medical research. We also prioritize proposed actions to improve attitudes and opinions about joining biobanks according to perceived responsiveness.

results169 participants completed the study, 51% of whom indicated a willingness to join the biobank. Willingness to join the biobank was not associated with age, gender, race, or education but was associated with respondent comfort sharing samples and clinical information, concerns related to confidentiality, potential for misuse of information, trust in UMD, and perceived health benefit. In ranked order, potential actions we surveyed that might alleviate some of these concerns include: increase chances to learn more about the biobank, increase opportunities to be updated, striving to put community concerns first, including involving community members as leaders of biobank research, and involving community members in decision making.

conclusionsThis study identified several attitudes and opinions that influence decisions to join a biobank, including many concerns that could potentially be addressed by engaging community members. We also demonstrate our method of prioritizing ways to improve attitudes and opinions about joining a biobank according to perceived responsiveness.

Indexed as

biobankbiorepositorydata sharingpreferencespublic opinionresearch participationsurveytrust

Identifiers

PMID26226006
PMCPMC4600147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.