The 1996 Bermuda Principles launched a new era in data sharing, reflecting a growing belief that the rapid public dissemination of research data was crucial to scientific progress in genetics. A historical review of data sharing policies in the field of genetics and genomics reflects changing scientific norms and evolving views of genomic data, particularly related to human subjects' protections and privacy concerns. The 2013 NIH Draft Genomic Data Sharing (GDS) Policy incorporates the most significant protections and guidelines to date. The GDS Policy, however, will face difficult challenges ahead as geneticists seek to balance the very real concerns of research participants and the scientific norms that propel research forward. This article provides a novel evaluation of genetic and GDS policies' treatment of human subjects' protections. The article examines not only the policies, but also some of the most pertinent scientific, legal, and regulatory developments that occurred alongside data sharing policies. This historical perspective highlights the challenges that future data sharing policies, including the recently disseminated NIH GDS Draft Policy, will encounter.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5033553 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsu032 | DOI Listing |
Neurol Res Pract
January 2025
Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Biometry, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg (JMU), Haus D7, Josef-Schneider-Straße 2, 97080, Würzburg, Germany.
Background: Comprehensive clinical data regarding factors influencing the individual disease course of patients with movement disorders treated with deep brain stimulation might help to better understand disease progression and to develop individualized treatment approaches.
Methods: The clinical core data set was developed by a multidisciplinary working group within the German transregional collaborative research network ReTune. The development followed standardized methodology comprising review of available evidence, a consensus process and performance of the first phase of the study.
BMC Palliat Care
January 2025
DEFACTUM, Central Region Denmark, Aarhus, Denmark.
Background: Despite growing research on the daily life of people with advanced cancer, more specific knowledge is needed about the specific strategies these people use to manage everyday activities.
Purpose: This study explores how people with advanced cancer manage their everyday activities and describe their specific strategies.
Methods: The qualitative study was designed with an explorative approach.
Arch Dis Child
January 2025
Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, People's Republic of China.
Background: The prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) among Chinese adolescents has continued to increase in recent years. Adolescents with IBD interrupted their schooling due to the diagnosis and treatment of the disease. And when the condition stabilises, they will return to school.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBMJ Open
January 2025
Cardiac Rehabilitation, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK.
Background: This qualitative evaluation was embedded in the Rehabilitation Exercise and psycholoGical support After COVID-19 InfectioN (REGAIN) study, a randomised controlled trial (RCT) for those with post-COVID-19 condition ('long COVID') after hospital admission for COVID-19, comparing weekly home-based, live online supervised group exercise and psychological support sessions with 'best practice usual care' (a single session of advice).
Objective: To increase our understanding of how and why the REGAIN programme might have worked and what helped or hindered this intervention.
Design: A qualitative evaluation which utilised interviews with participants and practitioners delivering the intervention.
BMJ Open
January 2025
Department of Health Behavior, Environment and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Public Health and Nursing, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Introduction: The results of open defecation-free (ODF) programmes vary greatly, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This study will systematically investigate available qualitative research to identify the elements contributing to open defecation programmes' effectiveness in various situations across LMICs. Furthermore, this review seeks to identify gaps in the available literature and areas that require additional investigation and action.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!