Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27776540›Full record

ArticleOrphanet journal of rare diseases2016

The alliance between genetic biobanks and patient organisations: the experience of the telethon network of genetic biobanks.

Chiara Baldo, Lorena Casareto, Alessandra Renieri, Giuseppe Merla, Barbara Garavaglia, Stefano Goldwurm, Elena Pegoraro, Maurizio Moggio, Marina Mora, Luisa Politano and 9 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orphanet journal of rare diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. The reported impact of public involvement in biobanks: A scoping review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2020
    Article
  8. Exploring the Impact ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

19 authors.

Chiara BaldoS.C. Laboratorio di Genetica Umana, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, Italy.
Lorena CasaretoUfficio Coordinamento Network, c/o U.O.S.D. Centro di Diagnostica Genetica e Biochimica delle Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, Genoa, Italy.
Alessandra RenieriMedical Genetics, University of Siena and Genetica Medica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy.
Giuseppe MerlaMedical Genetics Unit, IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, S. Giovanni Rotondo, FG, Italy.
Barbara GaravagliaU.O.C. Neurogenetica Molecolare, Fondazione I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy.
Stefano GoldwurmParkinson Institute, ASST Centro Specialistico Ortopedico Traumatologico G. Pini - CTO, Milan, Italy.
Elena PegoraroUniversità di Padova, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria, Padova, Italy.
Maurizio MoggioNeuromuscular and Rare Diseases Unit, Dino Ferrari Centre, IRCCS Foundation Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Marina MoraLaboratorio di Biologia Cellulare, UO Malattie Neuromuscolari e Neuroimmunologia, Fond. IRCCS Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy.
Luisa PolitanoCardiomiologia e Genetica Medica, Dipartimento di Medicina Sperimentale, Seconda Università di Napoli e Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria della SUN, Naples, Italy.
Luca SangiorgiS.S.D. Genetica Medica e Malattie Rare Ortopediche Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Bologna, Italy.
Raffaella MazzottiU.O.S.D. Centro di Diagnostica Genetica e Biochimica delle Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, Via G. Gaslini 5, 16147, Genoa, Italy.
Valeria ViottiS.C. Laboratorio di Genetica Umana, E.O. Ospedali Galliera, Genoa, Italy.
Ilaria MeloniMedical Genetics, University of Siena and Genetica Medica, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy.
Maria Teresa PellicoMedical Genetics Unit, IRCCS Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza, S. Giovanni Rotondo, FG, Italy.
Chiara BarzaghiU.O.C. Neurogenetica Molecolare, Fondazione I.R.C.C.S. Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta, Milan, Italy.
Chiuhui Mary WangFondazione Telethon, Milan, Italy.
Lucia MonacoFondazione Telethon, Milan, Italy.
Mirella FilocamoU.O.S.D. Centro di Diagnostica Genetica e Biochimica delle Malattie Metaboliche, Istituto G. Gaslini, Via G. Gaslini 5, 16147, Genoa, Italy. mirellafilocamo@gaslini.org.ORCID 0000-0001-5505-8507

Funding

Telethon GTB12001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRare diseases (RDs) are often neglected because they affect a small percentage of the population (6-8 %), which makes research and development of new therapies challenging processes. Easy access to high-quality samples and associated clinical data is therefore a key prerequisite for biomedical research. In this context, Genetic Biobanks are critical to developing basic, translational and clinical research on RDs. The Telethon Network of Genetic Biobanks (TNGB) is aware of the importance of biobanking as a service for patients and has started a dialogue with RD-Patient Organisations via promotion of dedicated meetings and round-tables, as well as by including their representatives on the TNGB Advisory Board. This has enabled the active involvement of POs in drafting biobank policies and procedures, including those concerning ethical issues. Here, we report on our experience with RD-Patient Organisations who have requested the services of existing biobanks belonging to TNGB and describe how these relationships were established, formalised and maintained.

resultsThe process of patient engagement has proven to be successful both for lay members, who increased their understanding of the complex processes of biobanking, and for professionals, who gained awareness of the needs and expectations of the people involved. This collaboration has resulted in a real interest on the part of Patient Organisations in the biobanking service, which has led to 13 written agreements designed to formalise this process. These agreements enabled the centralisation of rare genetic disease biospecimens and their related data, thus making them available to the scientific community.

conclusionsThe TNGB experience has proven to be an example of good practice with regard to patient engagement in biobanking and may serve as a model of collaboration between disease-oriented Biobanks and Patient Organisations. Such collaboration serves to enhance awareness and trust and to encourage the scientific community to address research on RDs.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksRare DiseasesBiomedical ResearchHumansAgreementsBiobankingNetworkingPatient involvementPatient organisationsRare diseasesResearchSample and data centralisation

Identifiers

PMID27776540
PMCPMC5078978

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.