Article Text
Abstract
Biobank research is potentially fruitful. It is argued that broad consent is acceptable for future research on biological material because a) the benefit is high, b) it pays respect to people’s autonomy, c) it is consistent with current practices and d) because the risk is low. Furthermore, broad consent should be allowed if information is handled safely, people can withdraw and expanded research should be approved by an ethics review board. However, these arguments are flawed and the criteria for broad consent are either too restrictive to allow any research or fail to address important challenges with biobank research. Broad consent for biobank research can hide substantial ethical challenges and threaten trust in research. This does not mean that biobank research should be abandoned or that people cannot authorise future research on donated biological material.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Competing interests: None.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Obtaining informed consent for genomics research in Africa: analysis of H3Africa consent documents
- The biobank consent debate: why ‘meta-consent’ is still the solution!
- International requirements for consent in biobank research: qualitative review of research guidelines
- The ‘Expiry Problem’ of broad consent for biobank research - And why a meta consent model solves it
- Ethics of dead participants: policy recommendations for biobank research
- Meta consent: a flexible and autonomous way of obtaining informed consent for secondary research
- Turning residual human biological materials into research collections: playing with consent
- The biobank consent debate: Why ‘meta-consent’ is not the solution?
- Biobank research, informed consent and society. Towards a new alliance?
- Public preferences towards data management and governance in Swiss biobanks: results from a nationwide survey