ReviewWestern journal of nursing research2022
Regulations and Norms for Reuse of Residual Clinical Biospecimens and Health Data.
Review in Western journal of nursing research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Use of Residual Blood Specimens in Seroprevalence Studies for Vaccine-Preventable Diseases: A Scoping Review.Vaccines · 2025Review
- Transparency in the secondary use of health data: assessing the status quo of guidance and best practices.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Evaluating and Extending the Informed Consent Ontology for Representing Permissions from the Clinical Domain.Applied ontology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nurse scientists are increasingly interested in conducting secondary research using real world collections of biospecimens and health data. The purposes of this scoping review are to (a) identify federal regulations and norms that bear authority or give guidance over reuse of residual clinical biospecimens and health data, (b) summarize domain experts' interpretations of permissions of such reuse, and (c) summarize key issues for interpreting regulations and norms. Final analysis included 25 manuscripts and 23 regulations and norms. This review illustrates contextual complexity for reusing residual clinical biospecimens and health data, and explores issues such as privacy, confidentiality, and deriving genetic information from biospecimens. Inconsistencies make it difficult to interpret, which regulations or norms apply, or if applicable regulations or norms are congruent. Tools are necessary to support consistent, expert-informed consent processes and downstream reuse of residual clinical biospecimens and health data by nurse scientists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.