Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30404642›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2018

Challenges arising when seeking broad consent for health research data sharing: a qualitative study of perspectives in Thailand.

Phaik Yeong Cheah, Nattapat Jatupornpimol, Borimas Hanboonkunupakarn, Napat Khirikoekkong, Podjanee Jittamala, Sasithon Pukrittayakamee, Nicholas P J Day, Michael Parker, Susan Bull

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Present value of future health data: ethics of data collection and use.Bulletin of the World Health Organization · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Solutions to COVID-19 data sharing.The Lancet. Digital health · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Data Access Committees.BMC medical ethics · 2020
    Article
  18. 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

9 authors.

Phaik Yeong CheahMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. phaikyeong@tropmedres.ac.
Nattapat JatupornpimolMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Borimas HanboonkunupakarnDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Napat KhirikoekkongMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Podjanee JittamalaDepartment of Tropical Hygiene, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Sasithon PukrittayakameeDepartment of Clinical Tropical Medicine, Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nicholas P J DayMahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit (MORU), Faculty of Tropical Medicine, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Michael ParkerThe Ethox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Susan BullThe Ethox Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 096527Wellcome Trust 106698/Z/14/ZWellcome Trust 2013132/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch funders, regulatory agencies, and journals are increasingly expecting that individual-level data from health research will be shared. Broad consent to such sharing is considered appropriate, feasible and acceptable in low- and middle-income settings, but to date limited empirical research has been conducted to inform the design of such processes. We examined stakeholder perspectives about how best to seek broad consent to sharing data from the Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, which implemented a data sharing policy and broad consent to data sharing in January 2016.

methodsBetween February and August 2017 qualitative data were collected at two sites, Bangkok and the Thai-Myanmar border town of Mae Sot. We conducted eighteen semi-structured interviews. We also conducted four focus group discussions with a total of nineteen people. Descriptive and thematic coding informed analysis of aspects of data sharing that are considered most important to inform participants about, and the best ways to explain complex and abstract topics relating to data sharing.

resultsThe findings demonstrated that clinical trial participants prioritise information about the potential benefits and harms of data sharing. Stakeholders made multiple suggestions for clarifying information provided about data sharing on such topics. There was significant variation amongst stakeholders' perspectives about how much information should be provided about data sharing, and it was clear that effective information provision should be responsive to the study, the study population, the individual research participant and the research context.

conclusionsEffectively communicating about data sharing with research participants is challenging in practice, highlighting the importance of robust and effective data sharing governance in this context. Broad consent should incorporate effective and efficient explanations of data sharing to promote informed decision-making, without impeding research participants' understandings of key aspects of the research from which data will be shared. Further work is required to refine both the development of core information about data sharing to be provided to all research participants, and appropriate solutions for context specific-challenges arising when explaining data sharing.

Indexed as

AdultBiomedical ResearchClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansInformation DisseminationInformed ConsentMaleMulticenter Studies as TopicOrganizational PolicyQualitative ResearchResearch SubjectsThailandBroad consentData sharingResearchResearch ethicsSecondary useThailand

Identifiers

PMID30404642
PMCPMC6223036

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.