Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing

Claire L. Simpson, Aaron J. Goldenberg, Rob Culverhouse, Denise Daley, Robert P. Igo, Gail P. Jarvik, Diptasri M. Mandal, Deborah Mascalzoni, Courtney Gray Montgomery, Brandon L. Pierce, Rosemarie Plaetke, Sanjay Shete, Katrina A.B. Goddard, Catherine M. Stein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The underlying ethos of dbGaP is that access to these data by secondary data analysts facilitates advancement of science. NIH has required that genome-wide association study data be deposited in the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) since 2003. In 2013, a proposed updated policy extended this requirement to next-generation sequencing data. However, recent literature and anecdotal reports suggest lingering logistical and ethical concerns about subject identifiability, informed consent, publication embargo enforcement, and difficulty in accessing dbGaP data. We surveyed the International Genetic Epidemiology Society (IGES) membership about their experiences. One hundred and seventy five (175) individuals completed the survey, a response rate of 27%. Of respondents who received data from dbGaP (43%), only 32% perceived the application process as easy but most (75%) received data within five months. Remaining challenges include difficulty in identifying an institutional signing official and an overlong application process. Only 24% of respondents had contributed data to dbGaP. Of these, 31% reported local IRB restrictions on data release; an additional 15% had to reconsent study participants before depositing data. The majority of respondents (56%) disagreed that the publication embargo period was sufficient. In response, we recommend longer embargo periods and use of varied data-sharing models rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)8383-8398
Number of pages16
JournalInternational journal of environmental research and public health
Volume11
Issue number8
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2014

Fingerprint

Information Dissemination
Genotype
Databases
Phenotype
Publications
Genome-Wide Association Study
Research Ethics Committees
Informed Consent
Surveys and Questionnaires

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

Simpson, C. L., Goldenberg, A. J., Culverhouse, R., Daley, D., Igo, R. P., Jarvik, G. P., ... Stein, C. M. (2014). Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing. International journal of environmental research and public health, 11(8), 8383-8398. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110808383

Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing. / Simpson, Claire L.; Goldenberg, Aaron J.; Culverhouse, Rob; Daley, Denise; Igo, Robert P.; Jarvik, Gail P.; Mandal, Diptasri M.; Mascalzoni, Deborah; Montgomery, Courtney Gray; Pierce, Brandon L.; Plaetke, Rosemarie; Shete, Sanjay; Goddard, Katrina A.B.; Stein, Catherine M.

In: International journal of environmental research and public health, Vol. 11, No. 8, 01.08.2014, p. 8383-8398.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Simpson, CL, Goldenberg, AJ, Culverhouse, R, Daley, D, Igo, RP, Jarvik, GP, Mandal, DM, Mascalzoni, D, Montgomery, CG, Pierce, BL, Plaetke, R, Shete, S, Goddard, KAB & Stein, CM 2014, 'Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing', International journal of environmental research and public health, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 8383-8398. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110808383
Simpson, Claire L. ; Goldenberg, Aaron J. ; Culverhouse, Rob ; Daley, Denise ; Igo, Robert P. ; Jarvik, Gail P. ; Mandal, Diptasri M. ; Mascalzoni, Deborah ; Montgomery, Courtney Gray ; Pierce, Brandon L. ; Plaetke, Rosemarie ; Shete, Sanjay ; Goddard, Katrina A.B. ; Stein, Catherine M. / Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing. In: International journal of environmental research and public health. 2014 ; Vol. 11, No. 8. pp. 8383-8398.
@article{343446f4b338485b80fa1927cba6807f,
title = "Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing",
abstract = "The underlying ethos of dbGaP is that access to these data by secondary data analysts facilitates advancement of science. NIH has required that genome-wide association study data be deposited in the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) since 2003. In 2013, a proposed updated policy extended this requirement to next-generation sequencing data. However, recent literature and anecdotal reports suggest lingering logistical and ethical concerns about subject identifiability, informed consent, publication embargo enforcement, and difficulty in accessing dbGaP data. We surveyed the International Genetic Epidemiology Society (IGES) membership about their experiences. One hundred and seventy five (175) individuals completed the survey, a response rate of 27{\%}. Of respondents who received data from dbGaP (43{\%}), only 32{\%} perceived the application process as easy but most (75{\%}) received data within five months. Remaining challenges include difficulty in identifying an institutional signing official and an overlong application process. Only 24{\%} of respondents had contributed data to dbGaP. Of these, 31{\%} reported local IRB restrictions on data release; an additional 15{\%} had to reconsent study participants before depositing data. The majority of respondents (56{\%}) disagreed that the publication embargo period was sufficient. In response, we recommend longer embargo periods and use of varied data-sharing models rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.",
author = "Simpson, {Claire L.} and Goldenberg, {Aaron J.} and Rob Culverhouse and Denise Daley and Igo, {Robert P.} and Jarvik, {Gail P.} and Mandal, {Diptasri M.} and Deborah Mascalzoni and Montgomery, {Courtney Gray} and Pierce, {Brandon L.} and Rosemarie Plaetke and Sanjay Shete and Goddard, {Katrina A.B.} and Stein, {Catherine M.}",
year = "2014",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3390/ijerph110808383",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "8383--8398",
journal = "International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health",
issn = "1661-7827",
publisher = "Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practical barriers and ethical challenges in genetic data sharing

AU - Simpson, Claire L.

AU - Goldenberg, Aaron J.

AU - Culverhouse, Rob

AU - Daley, Denise

AU - Igo, Robert P.

AU - Jarvik, Gail P.

AU - Mandal, Diptasri M.

AU - Mascalzoni, Deborah

AU - Montgomery, Courtney Gray

AU - Pierce, Brandon L.

AU - Plaetke, Rosemarie

AU - Shete, Sanjay

AU - Goddard, Katrina A.B.

AU - Stein, Catherine M.

PY - 2014/8/1

Y1 - 2014/8/1

N2 - The underlying ethos of dbGaP is that access to these data by secondary data analysts facilitates advancement of science. NIH has required that genome-wide association study data be deposited in the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) since 2003. In 2013, a proposed updated policy extended this requirement to next-generation sequencing data. However, recent literature and anecdotal reports suggest lingering logistical and ethical concerns about subject identifiability, informed consent, publication embargo enforcement, and difficulty in accessing dbGaP data. We surveyed the International Genetic Epidemiology Society (IGES) membership about their experiences. One hundred and seventy five (175) individuals completed the survey, a response rate of 27%. Of respondents who received data from dbGaP (43%), only 32% perceived the application process as easy but most (75%) received data within five months. Remaining challenges include difficulty in identifying an institutional signing official and an overlong application process. Only 24% of respondents had contributed data to dbGaP. Of these, 31% reported local IRB restrictions on data release; an additional 15% had to reconsent study participants before depositing data. The majority of respondents (56%) disagreed that the publication embargo period was sufficient. In response, we recommend longer embargo periods and use of varied data-sharing models rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

AB - The underlying ethos of dbGaP is that access to these data by secondary data analysts facilitates advancement of science. NIH has required that genome-wide association study data be deposited in the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) since 2003. In 2013, a proposed updated policy extended this requirement to next-generation sequencing data. However, recent literature and anecdotal reports suggest lingering logistical and ethical concerns about subject identifiability, informed consent, publication embargo enforcement, and difficulty in accessing dbGaP data. We surveyed the International Genetic Epidemiology Society (IGES) membership about their experiences. One hundred and seventy five (175) individuals completed the survey, a response rate of 27%. Of respondents who received data from dbGaP (43%), only 32% perceived the application process as easy but most (75%) received data within five months. Remaining challenges include difficulty in identifying an institutional signing official and an overlong application process. Only 24% of respondents had contributed data to dbGaP. Of these, 31% reported local IRB restrictions on data release; an additional 15% had to reconsent study participants before depositing data. The majority of respondents (56%) disagreed that the publication embargo period was sufficient. In response, we recommend longer embargo periods and use of varied data-sharing models rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926115415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926115415&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3390/ijerph110808383

DO - 10.3390/ijerph110808383

M3 - Article

C2 - 25153467

AN - SCOPUS:84926115415

VL - 11

SP - 8383

EP - 8398

JO - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

JF - International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

SN - 1661-7827

IS - 8

ER -