ArticleEuropean journal of human genetics : EJHG2025
Incorporating biobanking into the future of healthcare: exploring patient and healthcare worker perspectives at a Canadian tertiary academic hospital.
Article in European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Why do people trust (or mistrust) health organizations? A systematic review.International journal for equity in health · 2026Pooled it
- [Biobanking in internal medicine : Structures, opportunities and cultural responsibility].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Detection of Dengue Virus Serotype 3 Using a Colorimetric Reverse Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Assay: Evaluation with Clinical Samples from Southeastern Mexico.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- What's new in EJHG this autumn.European journal of human genetics : EJHG · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biobanks are an essential resource for researchers conducting scientific and translational research but require significant support from institutions and healthcare workers (HW) to operate and are reliant on patient consent and participation. In order to better understand the barriers to institution-wide biobanking, we conducted a survey to examine the knowledge, attitudes and concerns of patients and HW on a range of biobanking-related topics, including consenting practices, privacy and trust in the healthcare team and researchers, and current practices at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre. Overall, we found that there is strong patient and HW support for biobanking as a resource for research (89-96%). Furthermore, the majority 53% of HW are willing to incorporate biobanking into their clinical workflow and 39% had a neutral response. Encouragingly, patients possess a high level of trust in their healthcare team (80-99%). The main concerns regarding sample donation were 'breaches of privacy' and 'genetic information being used in an exclusionary (discriminatory) fashion.' Concerns around specimen utilization emerged as a major theme from HW. These results will inform and enhance future biobanking practices to improve the patient experience and increase patient engagement while streamlining specimen collection and utilization for scientific research.
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.