Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31948449›Full record

ArticleBMC medical ethics2020

Do patients and research subjects have a right to receive their genomic raw data? An ethical and legal analysis.

Christoph Schickhardt, Henrike Fleischer, Eva C Winkler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical ethics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. New Challenges for Anatomists in the Era of Omics.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors.

Christoph SchickhardtNational Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Henrike FleischerInstitute for German, European and International Medical Law, Public Health Law and Bioethics (IMGB), Universities of Heidelberg and Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Eva C WinklerNational Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Department of Medical Oncology, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. eva.winkler@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID 0000-0001-7460-0154

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs Next Generation Sequencing technologies are increasingly implemented in biomedical research and (translational) care, the number of study participants and patients who ask for release of their genomic raw data is set to increase. This raises the question whether research participants and patients have a legal and moral right to receive their genomic raw data and, if so, how this right should be implemented into practice.

methodsIn a first step we clarify some central concepts such as "raw data"; in a second step we sketch the international legal framework. The third step provides an extensive ethical analysis which comprehends two parts: an evaluation of whether there is a prima facie moral right to receive one's raw data, and a contextualization and discussion of the right in light of potentially conflicting interests and rights of the data subject herself and third parties; in a last fourth step we emphasize the main practical consequences of the ethical analyses and propose recommendations for the release of raw data.

resultsIn several legislations like the new European General Data Protection Regulation, patients do in principle have the right to receive their raw data. However, the procedural implementation of this right and whether it involves genetic counselling is at the discretion of the Member States. Even more questions remain with respect to the research context. The ethical analysis suggests that patients and research subjects have a moral right to receive their genomic raw data and addresses aspects which are also of relevance for the legal discussion such as the costs of release of raw data and its impact on academic freedom.

conclusionTaking into account the specific nature and implications of genomic raw data and the contexts of research and health care, several concerns and potentially conflicting interests of the data subjects themselves and involved researchers, physicians, biomedical institutions and relatives arise. Instead of using them to argue in favor of restrictions of the data subjects' legal and moral right to genomic raw data, the concerns should be addressed through provision of information and other measures. To this end, we propose relevant recommendations.

Indexed as

PatientsResearch SubjectsConfidentialityEthical AnalysisEuropeGenetic PrivacyGenetic ResearchGenomicsHumansInformed ConsentResearch PersonnelAccessEthicsGeneral data protection regulation (GDPR)GenomicInformational self-determinationLawPrivacyRaw dataRecommendationsReleaseRight

Identifiers

PMID31948449
PMCPMC6966790

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.