Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32946764›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of human genetics2020

Global Public Perceptions of Genomic Data Sharing: What Shapes the Willingness to Donate DNA and Health Data?

Anna Middleton, Richard Milne, Mohamed A Almarri, Shamim Anwer, Jerome Atutornu, Elena E Baranova, Paul Bevan, Maria Cerezo, Yali Cong, Christine Critchley and 39 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of human genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Expanding the boundaries of previously obtained informed consent in research: Views from participants in the Personalised Risk-based Mammascreening study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2023
    Trial
  6. Genomic Data Governance Challenges Between Research and Clinical Care: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. "ItResearch ethics · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

49 authors.

Anna MiddletonSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK; Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 8PQ, UK. Electronic address: am33@sanger.ac.uk.
Richard MilneSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK; Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK.
Mohamed A AlmarriWellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Shamim AnwerKeynote IAS, New Delhi 110060, India.
Jerome AtutornuSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Elena E BaranovaRussian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education, Moscow 119049, Russia.
Paul BevanWellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Maria CerezoEMBL-EBI, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Yali CongMedical Ethics Program, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Christine CritchleyDepartment of Psychological Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC 3122, Australia; Centre for Law and Genetics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.
Josepine FernowCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Peter GoodhandOntario Institute for Cancer Research, MaRS Centre, Toronto, ON M5G 0A3, Canada.
Qurratulain HasanDepartment of Genetics & Molecular Medicine, Kamineni Hospitals, Hyderabad 500 068, India; SAAZ Genetics, Hyderabad 500033, India.
Aiko HibinoFaculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hirosaki University, Hirosaki 036-8560, Japan.
Gry HouelandCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Heidi C HowardCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden; Medical Ethics, Lund Universitet, Lund SE-221 00, Sweden.
S Zakir HussainSAAZ Genetics, Hyderabad 500033, India.
Charlotta Ingvoldstad MalmgrenDepartment of Public Health and Caring Science, Uppsala University, Uppsala 751 22, Sweden; Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Solna 171 76, Sweden.
Vera L IzhevskayaResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Moscow 115522, Russia.
Aleksandra JędrzejakIndependent Scholar, Warsaw, Poland.
Cao JinhongDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Health Sciences, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430071, China.
Megumi KimuraInstitute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo 186-8603, Japan.
Erika KleidermanCentre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 0G1, Canada.
Brandi LeachRAND Europe, Cambridge CB4 1YG, UK.
Keying LiuPublic Health, Department of Social Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka 565-0871, Japan; School of Public Health, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Deborah MascalzoniEURAC, Institute of Biomedicine, Bolzano 39100, Italy; Centre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Álvaro MendesUnIGENe and CGPP (Centre for Predictive and Preventive Genetics), IBMC (Institute for Molecular and Cell Biology), i3S (Instituto de Investigação e Inovação em Saúde), Universidade do Porto, Porto 4200-135, Portugal.
Jusaku MinariUehiro Research Division for iPS Cell Ethics, Center for iPS Cell Research and Application (CiRA), Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Nan WangMedical Ethics Program, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
Dianne NicolCentre for Law and Genetics, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia.
Emilia NiemiecCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Christine PatchSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK; Genomics England, Queen Mary University of London, London EC1M 6BQ, UK.
Jack PollardRAND Europe, Cambridge CB4 1YG, UK.
Barbara PrainsackDepartment of Political Science, University of Vienna, Vienna 1010, Austria; Department of Global Health & Social Medicine, King's College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK.
Marie RivièreDiltec, Sorbonne Nouvelle, Paris 75005, France.
Lauren RobartsSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Jonathan RobertsSociety and Ethics Research Group, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Virginia RomanoCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden; EURAC, Institute of Biomedicine, Bolzano 39100, Italy.
Haytham A SheerahPublic Health, Department of Social Medicine, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka 565-0871, Japan.
James SmithWellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Alexandra SoulierCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Claire SteedWellcome Sanger Institute, Cambridge CB10 1SA, UK.
Vigdís StefànsdóttirLandspitali, the National University Hospital of Iceland, Reykjavík 101, Iceland.
Cornelia TandreCentre for Ethics & Bioethics, Uppsala University, Uppsala SE-751 22, Sweden.
Adrian ThorogoodCentre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 0G1, Canada.
Torsten H VoigtInstitute of Sociology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen 52062, Germany.
Anne V WestIndiana University Maurer School of Law, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA.
Go YoshizawaWork Research Institute (AFI), Oslo Metropolitan University, Oslo 0130, Norway.
Katherine I MorleyRAND Europe, Cambridge CB4 1YG, UK; Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King's College London, London SE5 8AF, UK; Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Global and Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia.

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analyzing genomic data across populations is central to understanding the role of genetic factors in health and disease. Successful data sharing relies on public support, which requires attention to whether people around the world are willing to donate their data that are then subsequently shared with others for research. However, studies of such public perceptions are geographically limited and do not enable comparison. This paper presents results from a very large public survey on attitudes toward genomic data sharing. Data from 36,268 individuals across 22 countries (gathered in 15 languages) are presented. In general, publics across the world do not appear to be aware of, nor familiar with, the concepts of DNA, genetics, and genomics. Willingness to donate one's DNA and health data for research is relatively low, and trust in the process of data's being shared with multiple users (e.g., doctors, researchers, governments) is also low. Participants were most willing to donate DNA or health information for research when the recipient was specified as a medical doctor and least willing to donate when the recipient was a for-profit researcher. Those who were familiar with genetics and who were trusting of the users asking for data were more likely to be willing to donate. However, less than half of participants trusted more than one potential user of data, although this varied across countries. Genetic information was not uniformly seen as different from other forms of health information, but there was an association between seeing genetic information as special in some way compared to other health data and increased willingness to donate. The global perspective provided by our "Your DNA, Your Say" study is valuable for informing the development of international policy and practice for sharing genomic data. It highlights that the research community not only needs to be worthy of trust by the public, but also urgent steps need to be taken to authentically communicate why genomic research is necessary and how data donation, and subsequent sharing, is integral to this.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanAdultAmericasAsiaAustraliaEuropeFemaleGenomicsHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansInformation DisseminationMalePublic HealthSequence Analysis, DNASurveys and Questionnairesattitudesdata donationdata sharinggenomic datagenomic data sharingglobalhealth datapublicsurveytrust

Identifiers

PMID32946764
PMCPMC7536612

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.