Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37337739›Full record

ArticleJournal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE2023

Persuasive Appeals in Genetic Biobank Recruitment Campaigns: Social and Ethical Implications.

Martin Meitern, Sten Hansson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Martin MeiternUniversity of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0002-7284-1525
Sten HanssonUniversity of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia.ORCID 0000-0002-1748-1969

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The social and ethical implications of large-scale biobank donor recruitment campaigns have remained understudied. We use two recent campaigns of the population-based genetic biobank in Estonia as an example to demonstrate how campaign spokespersons try to persuade potential donors by appealing to (1) gaining self-knowledge, (2) gaining control over one's health, (3) fear of illness, (4) contributing to healthcare, (5) contributing to science, and (6) contributing to one's country. While these campaigns succeeded in recruiting 15 percent of the country's adult population as donors, we explain how the use of some of these appeals may (a) create unrealistic expectations regarding the benefits donors could receive and (b) conceal the risks regarding health data. The study lays a necessary groundwork for future empirical research on the ethics of biobank recruitment campaigns.

Indexed as

Biological Specimen BanksPersuasive CommunicationAdultFearHumansTissue Donorsbiobankinggenetic literacygenetic researchpersuasionrecruitmentscience communicationtherapeutic misconception

Identifiers

PMID37337739
PMCPMC10496419

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.