Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41555922›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2025

Conditional trust as a driver of public engagement in Korea's national project of bio-big data.

Jae Sun Kim, Seohyun Kim, Cheyeon Lee, Wonoh Jeong, Huiwon No, Sungsoo Lim, Yul Jung, Ilhak Lee, Kwangmo Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 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

9 authors.

Jae Sun KimCollege of Law, Dongguk University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seohyun KimSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Cheyeon LeeSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Wonoh JeongSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Huiwon NoSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Sungsoo LimHealthcare Research Division, Gallup Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yul JungCollege of Law, Dongguk University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Ilhak LeeAsian Institute for Bioethics and Health Law, Department of Medical Humanities and Social Sciences, College of Medicine, Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Kwangmo YangSamsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Trust is built on the belief that promises will be honored. In biodata research, public trust is established when researchers conduct studies as promised and utilize the research outcomes in accordance with the stated objectives. Participants, particularly those contributing sensitive data, often demand a detailed explanation regarding how their data will be utilized and governed, which forms the foundation of trust. The National Project of Bio-Big Data (NPBBD) was conceived upon this premise. Within this framework, participants recognize the necessity of biobanks, the state ensures trustworthy governance through institutional safeguards, and researchers uphold these commitments-thereby sustaining a cycle of trust. Although prior studies have examined public attitudes toward biobanks and general willingness to participate, less is known about their perspectives on consent models, governance structures, benefit-sharing mechanisms, and motivations for engagement. Persistently low participation rates highlight the need for systematic analysis of underlying barriers and strategies to strengthen public involvement. Considering the NPBBD's goal of building a nationwide cohort of one million individuals, this study seeks to identify the motivating factors that can foster improved public participation. By assessing public awareness and participation drivers, we aim to delineate the conditions of trust from the participants' perspectives and offer guidance for data-driven policies grounded in medical, ethical, legal, and social legitimacy. Methods: Between August 22-30, 2024, a web- and mobile-based survey was conducted among 1,027 adults aged 19-64 years, residing across 17 provinces and metropolitan cities in Korea, selected via proportional allocation. The questionnaire, developed with reference to prior studies including ethical, legal, and social implications, comprised 19 items across six domains, and 16 sociodemographic questions. Results: Overall, 15.1% of the respondents were aware of the NPBBD, and 35.1% had heard of it, as compared to 49.1% who recognized the term "biobank." Willingness to participate varied by incentive: 60.9% expressed willingness to participate when personal benefits were offered, 29.9% were motivated by public interest, and 9.3% declined participation altogether. Among the non-participants, 18.9% agreed to participate when presented with a rare disease scenario. Anticipated benefits included early detection and prevention (mean score: 78.3), treatment for rare or incurable diseases (76.5), and advancement of research (75.4). Key concerns centered on data breach (77.0), third-party misuse (76.1), and unconsented data use (75.6). Participation drivers included contribution to science (74.6), support for future generations (72.5), and personal benefits (68.1), with access to professional consultation (78.6) emerging as the most influential factor. The most desired information was genetic risk prediction (62.8%). Respondents favored receiving updates on sanctions for misuse (82.0%), supervisors assigned to monitor data use (80.3%), and ongoing research use (75.0%), through text messages (41.0%) and email (36.1%). Regarding additional data, 39.6% were willing to share information about their health, lifestyle, and habits; 38.0% preferred to share health information only; and 13.2% were ready to give biospecimens only. While the majority of participants favored reinvesting profits into drug and treatment development, others preferred receiving benefits through partial coverage of treatment costs (64.1%). In terms of governance, most respondents preferred a shared model involving government, public, and private institutions (44.7%). Consent preferences leaned toward dynamic (57.8%) over broad consent (35.2%). Discussion: Public perception of biodata collection reflected a mix of anticipated personal and public benefits, alongside concerns regarding data disclosure. Willingness to participate was influenced more by personal benefits (60.9%) than by public interest (29.9%). While personal incentives such as treatment cost coverage were valued, participation was also driven by a desire to contribute to research and support drug development, reflecting a blend of self-interest and altruistic motivation. Concerns centered on data leakage, with dynamic consent emerging as a key condition of trust, alongside public governance and the right to information. To secure public trust and increase participation in the NPBBD, tailored strategies must be used to balance personal and public benefits with transparent governance, information provision, and consent procedures.

Indexed as

biobankbio-big dataELSINPBBDpublic engagementsurvey

Identifiers

PMID41555922
PMCPMC12812399

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.