ArticlePLoS biology2015
Controlled Access under Review: Improving the Governance of Genomic Data Access.
Article in PLoS biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterizing core outcomes of responsible stewardship for human genomic data in the cloud.BMC medical genomics · 2026Article
- Data access arrangements in genomic research consortia.Scientific reports · 2024Review
- Investigating the Roles and Responsibilities of Institutional Signing Officials After Data Sharing Policy Reform for Federally Funded Research in the United States: National Survey.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Artificial intelligence and medical research databases: ethical review by data access committees.BMC medical ethics · 2023Article
- Leveraging Algorithms to Improve Decision-Making Workflows for Genomic Data Access and Management.Biopreservation and biobanking · 2022Article
- Blockchains as a means to promote privacy protecting, access availing, incentive increasing, ELSI lessening DNA databases.Frontiers in digital health · 2022Review
- An agenda-setting paper on data sharing platforms: euCanSHare workshop.Open research Europe · 2021Article
- Is useful research data usually shared? An investigation of genome-wide association study summary statistics.PloS one · 2020Article
- Benefits and barriers in the design of harmonized access agreements for international data sharing.Scientific data · 2019Article
- Sharing data for future research-engaging participants' views about data governance beyond the original project: a DIRECT Study.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Article
- Return of individual genomic research results: are laws and policies keeping step?European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2019Article
- Big Data Needs Big Governance: Best Practices From Brain-CODE, the Ontario-Brain Institute's Neuroinformatics Platform.Frontiers in genetics · 2019Article
- Blockchain-based platforms for genomic data sharing: a de-centralized approach in response to the governance problems?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Article
- The role of ethics in data governance of large neuro-ICT projects.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018Review
- The challenges of the expanded availability of genomic information: an agenda-setting paper.Journal of community genetics · 2018Article
- Including all voices in international data-sharing governance.Human genomics · 2018Article
- Germline contamination and leakage in whole genome somatic single nucleotide variant detection.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- The author who wasn't there? Fairness and attribution in publications following access to population biobanks.PloS one · 2018Article
- Balancing the local and the universal in maintaining ethical access to a genomics biobank.BMC medical ethics · 2017Review
- Access policies in biobank research: what criteria do they include and how publicly available are they? A cross-sectional study.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2017Article
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
Abstract
In parallel with massive genomic data production, data sharing practices have rapidly expanded over the last decade. To ensure authorized access to data, access review by data access committees (DACs) has been utilized as one potential solution. Here we discuss core elements to be integrated into the fabric of access review by both established and emerging DACs in order to foster fair, efficient, and responsible access to datasets. We particularly highlight the fact that the access review process could be adversely influenced by the potential conflicts of interest of data producers, particularly when they are directly involved in DACs management. Therefore, in structuring DACs and access procedures, possible data withholding by data producers should receive thorough attention.
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.