Ethics Reporting in Biospecimen and Genetic Research: Current Practice and Suggestions for Changes

William Wei Lim Chin, Susanne Wieschowski, Jana Prokein, Thomas Illig and Daniel Strech

PLOS Biology, 2016, vol. 14, issue 8, 1-6

Abstract: Modern approaches for research with human biospecimens employ a variety of substantially different types of ethics approval and informed consent. In most cases, standard ethics reporting such as “consent and approval was obtained” is no longer meaningful. A structured analysis of 120 biospecimen studies recently published in top journals revealed that more than 85% reported on consent and approval, but in more than 90% of cases, this reporting was insufficient and thus potentially misleading. Editorial policies, reporting guidelines, and material transfer agreements should include recommendations for meaningful ethics reporting in biospecimen research. Meaningful ethics reporting is possible without higher word counts and could support public trust as well as networked research.This Perspective shows that while ethics reporting on consent and approval for biospecimen research is widespread, for the majority of cases it is not meaningful; the authors make pragmatic suggestions of substantial changes needed to remedy this.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002521 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file ... 02521&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pbio00:1002521

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002521

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS Biology from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosbiology ().