Governance and Privacy in a Provincial Data Repository - A Cross-sectional Analysis of Longitudinal Birth Cohort Parent Participants' Perspectives on Sharing Adult Vs. Child Research Data

Research data abound and are increasingly shared through a variety of platforms, such as biobanks for precision health and data repositories for reuse of research and administrative data. Data sharing presents great opportunities as well as significant ethical and legal concerns, such as privacy, consent, governance, access, and communication. Respectful data governance calls for stakeholder engagement during platform development. This stakeholder-engagement study used a web-based survey to capture the views of research participants about governance strategies for secondary data use. Survey response rate was 60.8% (n = 346). Parents’ primary concern was ensuring appropriate data re-use of data, even over privacy. Appropriate re-use included project-specific access and limiting access to researchers with more-trusted affiliations like academia. Other affiliations (e.g. industry, government and not-for-profit) were less palatable. Parents considered pediatric data more sensitive than adult data and expressed more reluctance towards sharing child identifiers compared to their own (p-value<0.001). This study stresses the importance of repository governance strategies to sustain long-term access to valuable data assets via large-scale repository.

[1]  R. Gallagher,et al.  From consent to institutions: designing adaptive governance for genomic biobanks. , 2011, Social science & medicine.

[2]  Lehana Thabane,et al.  Alternatives to project-specific consent for access to personal information for health research: Insights from a public dialogue , 2008, BMC medical ethics.

[3]  Timothy Caulfield,et al.  Biobanks and Blanket Consent: The Proper Place of the Public Good and Public Perception Rationales , 2007 .

[4]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  The ethics of secondary data analysis: Considering the application of Belmont principles to the sharing of neuroimaging data , 2013, NeuroImage.

[5]  Bradley Malin,et al.  Biomedical data privacy: problems, perspectives, and recent advances , 2013, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[6]  Angela P. Wetzel Internet, mail, and mixed‐mode surveys: The tailored design method , 2010 .

[7]  A. McGuire,et al.  DNA data sharing: research participants' perspectives , 2008, Genetics in Medicine.

[8]  G. Laurie Reflexive governance in biobanking: on the value of policy led approaches and the need to recognise the limits of law , 2011, Human Genetics.

[9]  D. Collins Pretesting survey instruments: An overview of cognitive methods , 2003, Quality of Life Research.

[10]  Ellen Wright Clayton,et al.  Parental Perspectives on a Pediatric Human Non-Subjects Biobank , 2012, AJOB primary research.

[11]  Joan Scott,et al.  Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. , 2009, American journal of human genetics.

[12]  C. Adair,et al.  Cognitive Interviewing Methods for Questionnaire Pre-Testing in Homeless Persons with Mental Disorders , 2012, Journal of Urban Health.

[13]  S. Rasmussen,et al.  Maternal attitudes toward DNA collection for gene–environment studies: A qualitative research study , 2009, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[14]  L. Mccargar,et al.  The Alberta Pregnancy Outcomes and Nutrition (APrON) cohort study: rationale and methods. , 2014, Maternal & child nutrition.

[15]  Siobhan M. Dolan,et al.  The All Our Babies pregnancy cohort: design, methods, and participant characteristics , 2013, BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth.

[16]  L. Ross,et al.  Attitudes of African-American parents about biobank participation and return of results for themselves and their children , 2012, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[17]  S. Fullerton,et al.  Genomic research and wide data sharing: Views of prospective participants , 2010, Genetics in Medicine.

[18]  L. Beskow,et al.  Informed Consent for Biorepositories: Assessing Prospective Participants' Understanding and Opinions , 2008, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[19]  Timothy Caulfield,et al.  Biobanks, consent and claims of consensus , 2012, Nature Methods.

[20]  Nicole Letourneau,et al.  Parent Perspectives on Privacy and Governance for a Pediatric Repository of Non-Biological, Research Data , 2015, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.

[21]  S. Fullerton,et al.  Informed Consent in Genome-Scale Research: What Do Prospective Participants Think? , 2012, AJOB primary research.

[22]  B. Kaplan,et al.  Comparison of sample characteristics in two pregnancy cohorts: community-based versus population-based recruitment methods , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[23]  L. Ross,et al.  Empirical data about women's attitudes towards a hypothetical pediatric biobank , 2008, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[24]  Shawn X. Dodd,et al.  Parental perspectives on consent for participation in large-scale, non-biological data repositories , 2016, Life sciences, society and policy.

[25]  L. Ross,et al.  Empirical data about women's attitudes toward a biobank focused on pregnancy outcomes , 2008, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[26]  S. Fullerton,et al.  Glad You Asked: Participants' Opinions of Re-Consent for DbGap Data Submission , 2010, Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHRE.