Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40034379›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025

Healthcare professionals and scientists' collaboration with biobanks: a pilot study on the assessment of knowledge and attitudes toward biospecimen donation.

Anastasiia A Mikhailova, Elena S Bogomiagkova, Yulia A Nasykhova, Roman A Illarionov, Maria M Danilova, Ziravard N Tonyan, Vyacheslav B Chernykh, Ludmila V Kovalenko, Olesya N Bespalova, Andrey S Glotov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Anastasiia A Mikhailova *D.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Elena S Bogomiagkova *Saint Petersburg State University, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Yulia A NasykhovaD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Roman A IllarionovD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Maria M DanilovaD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Ziravard N TonyanD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Vyacheslav B ChernykhResearch Centre for Medical Genetics, Moscow, Russia.
Ludmila V KovalenkoBudgetary Institution of Highest Education of KHMAO-Yugra "Surgut State University", Surgut, Russia.
Olesya N BespalovaD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.
Andrey S GlotovD.O. Ott Research Institute of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductology, Saint Petersburg, Russia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Difficulties in the biobank progress are often associated with insufficient public awareness, but it is also worth paying attention to healthcare and science professionals who play an important role in the development of this area. This article presents results of the research on awareness toward biobanking and motivation to collaborate among employees of 3 medical and scientific organizations in Russia. Methods: The anonymous survey was carried out via an online platform. The research included 176 healthcare and science professionals. To assess the differences between the groups the Pearson Chi-square test and the contingency coefficient were used. To find correlations between nominal and interval variables the Eta criterion was applied. Results: It was found that 88.1% of respondents were aware of biobanking in general, however, 15.0% were not aware of a biobank in their organization or had difficulty in answering this question. The experience of cooperation with biobanks was not particularly extensive - more than half of the respondents (60.3%) indicated that they had never contacted biobanks. 11.9% of participants became donors themselves. 35.0% - suggested to their friends and patients to become donors, while 86.2% were willing to do this in the future. The study showed that the respondents who already had experience working with biobanks, as well as those who themselves act as a donor, rated the importance of their activities higher. Conclusion: It is important to increase not only awareness but also motivation to cooperate with biobanks and be willing to take on different roles.

Indexed as

awarenessbiobankbiobankingbioresource collectionmedical staffsurvey

Identifiers

PMID40034379
PMCPMC11872889

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.