Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30638412›Full record

ArticleBiopreservation and biobanking2019

Critical Financial Challenges for Biobanking: Report of a National Cancer Institute Study.

Abhi Rao, Jim Vaught, Bill Tulskie, Dorie Olson, Hana Odeh, Jeffrey McLean, Helen M Moore

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biopreservation and biobanking, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Advancing Wildlife Conservation Through Biobanking in South America.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Biobank and Pathology Facility: A Successful Combination.Journal of biomolecular techniques : JBT · 2022
    Article
  15. Basic principles of biobanking: from biological samples to precision medicine for patients.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

7 authors.

Abhi Rao1 Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Jim Vaught2 Editor-in-Chief, Biopreservation and Biobanking.
Bill Tulskie3 Life Data Systems, Inc., Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Dorie Olson3 Life Data Systems, Inc., Gaithersburg, Maryland.
Hana Odeh1 Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Jeffrey McLean4 Leidos Biomedical Research, Inc., Rockville, Maryland.
Helen M Moore1 Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearchers and other key stakeholders in biobanking often do not have a thorough understanding of the true costs and challenges associated with initiating, running, and maintaining a biobank. The National Cancer Institute's Biorepositories and Biospecimen Research Branch (BBRB) commissioned the Biobanking Financial Sustainability survey to better understand the challenges that biobanks face in supporting ongoing operations. A series of interviews with biobanking managers and an international focus group session informed the content of the survey.

methodsThe design of the survey included five main sections, each containing questions related to primary topics as follows: general demographics, operations, funding sources, costs, and financial challenges. While the survey focused on financial issues and challenges, it also explored staffing and strategic planning as these issues relate to the sustainability of operations and financial support. U.S. and international biobanks were included in the survey.

resultsBiobanks in general are dependent on public funding and most biobanks do not have formal plans for the long-term stewardship of their collections. Respondents are working at a critical level of personnel and are not in a position to further reduce staffing. Smaller biobanks in particular need assistance in defining reasonable cost recovery user fees for biospecimens and related services.

conclusionsThe survey results highlight several issues that are important for long-term biobank sustainability. It is critical to prepare for such issues as effective biobanking practices have increasingly been recognized as a key component for the advancement of precision medicine.

Indexed as

Financial SupportBiological Specimen BanksBiomedical ResearchHumansNational Cancer Institute (U.S.)United Statesbiobankbiobankingbiobanking economicseconomicsfinancial sustainabilityrepositories

Identifiers

PMID30638412
PMCPMC6479261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.