Abstract
Advances in computing technology and bioinformatics mean that medical research is increasingly characterized by large international consortia of researchers that are reliant on large data sets and biobanks. These trends raise a number of challenges for obtaining consent, protecting participant privacy concerns and maintaining public trust. Participant-centred initiatives (PCIs) use social media technologies to address these immediate concerns, but they also provide the basis for long-term interactive partnerships. Here, we give an overview of this rapidly moving field by providing an analysis of the different PCI approaches, as well as the benefits and challenges of implementing PCIs.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Long-term participant retention and engagement patterns in an app and wearable-based multinational remote digital depression study
npj Digital Medicine Open Access 17 February 2023
-
Ten years of dynamic consent in the CHRIS study: informed consent as a dynamic process
European Journal of Human Genetics Open Access 05 September 2022
-
The Cure SMA Clinical Trial Experience Survey: A Study of Trial Participant Perspectives on Clinical Trial Management and Patient-Centric Management Practices
Neurology and Therapy Open Access 30 May 2022
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$189.00 per year
only $15.75 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Get just this article for as long as you need it
$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Mascalzoni, D. et al. Consenting in population genomics as an open communication process. Stud. Ethics Law Tech. 3, 2 (2009).
McGuire, A., Caulfield, T. & Cho, M. Research ethics and the challenge of whole-genome sequencing. Nature Rev. Genet. 9, 152–156 (2008).
Wagstaff, A. International biobanking regulations: the promise and the pitfalls. Cancer World 42, 23–29 (2011).
Schulte in den Bäumen, T., Paci, D. & Ibarreta, D. Data protection and sample management in biobanking—a legal dichotomy. Genomics Soc. Policy 6, 33–46 (2010).
Kaye, J. From single biobanks to international networks: developing e-governance. Hum. Genet. 130, 377–382 (2011).
Heeney, C., Hawkins, N., de Vries J., Boddington P. & Kaye, J. Assessing the privacy risks of data sharing in genomics. Pub. Health Gen. 14, 17–25 (2010).
Kaye, J. The tension between data sharing and the protection of privacy in genomics research. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 9 Mar 2012 (doi:10.1146/annurev-genom-082410-101454).
Brown, I., Brown, L. & Korff, D. Using patient data for research without consent. Law Inn. Tech. 2, 219–258 (2010).
Trinidad, S. B. et al. Genomic research and wide data sharing: views of prospective participants. Genet. Med. 12, 486–495 (2010).
Shelton, R. H. Electronic consent channels: preserving patient privacy without handcuffing researchers. Sci. Transl. Med. 3, 69cm4 (2011).
Terry, S. F. & Terry, P. F. Power to the people: participant ownership of clinical trial data. Sci. Transl. Med. 3, 69cm3 (2011).
Bourgeois, F. C., Taylor, P. L., Emans, S. J., Nigrin, D. J. & Mandl, K. D. Whose personal control? Creating private, personally controlled health records for pediatric and adolescent patients. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 15, 737–743 (2008).
Feied, C. F. et al. Clinical information systems: instant ubiquitous clinical data for error reduction and improved clinical outcomes. Acad. Emerg. Med. 11, 1162–1169 (2004).
Porter, S. C., Forbes, P., Manzi, S. & Kalish, L. Patients providing the answers: narrowing the gap in data quality for emergency care. Qual. Saf. Health Care 19, 1–5 (2010).
Mahoney, C. D., Berard-Collins, C. M., Coleman, R., Amaral, J. F. & Cotter, C. M. Effects of an integrated clinical information system on medication safety in a multi-hospital setting. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 64, 1969–1977 (2007).
Baker, L. C. Benefits of interoperability: a closer look at the estimates. Health Aff. 19 Jan 2005 (doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.w5.22).
Walker, J. et al. The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff. 19 Jan 2005 (doi:10.1377/hlthaff.w5.10).
Hook, J. M., Pan, E., Adler-Milstein, J., Bu, D. & Walker, J. The value of healthcare information exchange and interoperability in New York state. AMIA Annu. Symp. Proc. 2006, 953 (2006).
Teich, J. M. The benefits of sharing clinical information. Ann. Emerg. Med. 31, 274–276 (1998).
Wicks, P., Vaughan, T. E., Massagli, M. P. & Heywood, J. Accelerated clinical discovery using self-reported patient data collected online and a patient-matching algorithm. Nature Biotech. 29, 411–414 (2011).
Do, C. B. et al. Web-based genome-wide association study identifies two novel loci and a substantial genetic component for Parkinson's disease. PLoS Genet. 7, e1002141 (2011).
Cross, M. BMA warns against letting patients have access to their electronic records. BMJ 342, 206 (2011).
Al-Ubaydli, M. A. & Smith, R. The BMA has adopted an old fashioned, paternalistic, and misguided policy by warning against patients having access to their electronic records. BMJ Rapid Response [online], (2011).
TheAcademy of Medical Sciences. Personal data for public good: using health information in medical research. The Academy of Medical Sciences [online], (2006).
Wellcome Trust. Public attitudes to research governance: a qualitative study in a deliberative context. Wellcome Trust [online], (2007).
Medical Research Council. The use of personal health information in medical research. Medical Research Council [online], (2007).
Khong, S.-Y., Currie, I. & Eccles, S. NHS Connecting for Health and the National Programme for Information Technology. Obstetrician Gynaecol. 10, 27–32 (2008).
The Royal Academy of Engineering. Privacy and prejudice: young people's views on the development and use of electronic patient records. The Royal Academy of Engineering [online], (2010).
Eriksson, N. et al. Web-based, participant-driven studies yield novel genetic associations for common traits. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000993 (2010).
Acknowledgements
J.K. would like to thank the Wellcome Trust (096599/2/11/Z). J.K., L.C., N.K. and D.L. thank EnCoRe (TSB/ESPRC/ESRC EP/G002541/1). K.E., S.M.F. and N.A. thank the UW Institute of Translational Health Sciences (NCRR/NCATS, UL1 RR025014). J.S. thanks the UK National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre in Oxford, UK. S.F.T. thanks the Health Resources and Services Administration at the US Department of Health and Human Services (U33MC07945-04).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Related links
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kaye, J., Curren, L., Anderson, N. et al. From patients to partners: participant-centric initiatives in biomedical research. Nat Rev Genet 13, 371–376 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3218
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3218
This article is cited by
-
Long-term participant retention and engagement patterns in an app and wearable-based multinational remote digital depression study
npj Digital Medicine (2023)
-
Ten years of dynamic consent in the CHRIS study: informed consent as a dynamic process
European Journal of Human Genetics (2022)
-
The Cure SMA Clinical Trial Experience Survey: A Study of Trial Participant Perspectives on Clinical Trial Management and Patient-Centric Management Practices
Neurology and Therapy (2022)
-
Adding dynamic consent to a longitudinal cohort study: A qualitative study of EXCEED participant perspectives
BMC Medical Ethics (2021)
-
Balancing scientific interests and the rights of participants in designing a recall by genotype study
European Journal of Human Genetics (2021)