Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38837943›Full record

ReviewGigaScience2024

Future-proofing genomic data and consent management: a comprehensive review of technology innovations.

Adrien Oliva, Anubhav Kaphle, Roc Reguant, Letitia M F Sng, Natalie A Twine, Yuwan Malakar, Anuradha Wickramarachchi, Marcel Keller, Thilina Ranbaduge, Eva K F Chan and 9 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in GigaScience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Methods for safely sharing dual-use genetic data.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Imaging genomics of cancer: a bibliometric analysis and review.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

19 authors.

Adrien OlivaAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9950-7220
Anubhav KaphleAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1972-6819
Roc ReguantAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0350-3899
Letitia M F SngAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0217-9927
Natalie A TwineAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2051-8275
Yuwan MalakarResponsible Innovation Future Science Platform, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Brisbane, 41 Boggo Rd, Dutton Park QLD 4102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9067-7108
Anuradha WickramarachchiAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4160-5965
Marcel KellerData61, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 5/13 Garden St, Eveleigh NSW 2015, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2261-9376
Thilina RanbadugeData61, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Building 101, Clunies Ross St, Black Mountain, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5405-3704
Eva K F ChanNSW Health Pathology, Sydney, 1 Reserve Road, St Leonards NSW 2065, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6104-3763
James BreenTelethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-6184-0925
Sam BuckberryTelethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2388-6046
Boris GuennewigSydney Medical School, Brain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, 94 Mallett St, Camperdown NSW 2050, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6357-818X
Matilda HaasAustralian Genomics, Parkville, VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5149-0471
Alex BrownTelethon Kids Institute, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2112-3918
Mark J CowleyChildren's Cancer Institute, Lowy Cancer Research Centre, Level 4, Lowy Cancer Research Centre Corner Botany & High Streets UNSW Kensington Campus UNSW Sydney, Kensington NSW 2052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9519-5714
Natalie ThorneUniversity of Melbourne, Melbourne, Parkville VIC 3052, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5378-7674
Yatish JainAustralian e-Health Research Centre, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Level 3/160 Hawkesbury Rd, Westmead NSW 2145, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0556-6586
Denis C BauerApplied BioSciences, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Macquarie University, Applied BioSciences 205B Culloden Rd Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8033-9810

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic information is increasingly used to inform medical treatments and manage future disease risks. However, any personal and societal gains must be carefully balanced against the risk to individuals contributing their genomic data. Expanding our understanding of actionable genomic insights requires researchers to access large global datasets to capture the complexity of genomic contribution to diseases. Similarly, clinicians need efficient access to a patient's genome as well as population-representative historical records for evidence-based decisions. Both researchers and clinicians hence rely on participants to consent to the use of their genomic data, which in turn requires trust in the professional and ethical handling of this information. Here, we review existing and emerging solutions for secure and effective genomic information management, including storage, encryption, consent, and authorization that are needed to build participant trust. We discuss recent innovations in cloud computing, quantum-computing-proof encryption, and self-sovereign identity. These innovations can augment key developments from within the genomics community, notably GA4GH Passports and the Crypt4GH file container standard. We also explore how decentralized storage as well as the digital consenting process can offer culturally acceptable processes to encourage data contributions from ethnic minorities. We conclude that the individual and their right for self-determination needs to be put at the center of any genomics framework, because only on an individual level can the received benefits be accurately balanced against the risk of exposing private information.

Indexed as

GenomicsCloud ComputingComputer SecurityHumansInformed Consentdecentralized systemsdynamic consentgenome data privacyself-sovereign identitytrust model

Identifiers

PMID38837943
PMCPMC11152178

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.