Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35428611›Full record

ReviewBMJ open2022

Lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic about sample access for research in the UK.

Jessica M Sims, Emma Lawrence, Katy Glazer, Amir Gander, Barry Fuller, Brian R Davidson, Jonathan Garibaldi, Philip R Quinlan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Jessica M SimsDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Emma LawrenceDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9018-6010
Katy GlazerDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Amir GanderDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Barry FullerDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Brian R DavidsonDivision of Surgery and Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Jonathan GaribaldiSchool of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK.
Philip R QuinlanDigital Health, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, UK philip.quinlan@nottingham.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3012-6646

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MR/R022488/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveAnnotated clinical samples taken from patients are a foundation of translational medical research and give mechanistic insight into drug trials. Prior research by the Tissue Directory and Coordination Centre (TDCC) indicated that researchers, particularly those in industry, face many barriers in accessing patient samples. The arrival of the COVID-19 pandemic to the UK produced an immediate and extreme shockwave, which impacted on the ability to undertake all crucial translational research. As a national coordination centre, the TDCC is tasked with improving efficiency in the biobanking sector. Thus, we took responsibility to identify and coordinate UK tissue sample collection organisations (biobanks) able to collect COVID-19-related samples for researchers between March and September 2020.

findingsAlmost a third of UK biobanks were closed during the first wave of the UK COVID-19 pandemic. Of the remainder, 43% had limited capabilities while 26% maintained normal activity. Of the nationally prioritised COVID-19 interventional studies, just three of the five that responded to questioning were collecting human samples. Of the 41 requests for COVID-19 samples received by the TDCC, only four could be fulfilled due to a lack of UK coordinated strategy. Meanwhile, in the background there are numerous reports that sample collections in the UK remain largely underutilised.

conclusionThe response to a pandemic demands high level co-ordinated research responses to reduce mortality. Our study highlights the lack of efficiency and coordination between human sample collections and clinical trials across the UK. UK sample access is not working for researchers, clinicians or patients. A radical change is required in the strategy for sample collection and distribution to maximise this valuable resource of human-donated samples.

Indexed as

COVID-19Biological Specimen BanksHumansPandemicsUnited KingdomCOVID-19ethics (see Medical Ethics)health informaticshealth policy

Identifiers

PMID35428611
PMCPMC9013782

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.