Responsible data sharing in international health research: a systematic review of principles and norms.


Journal

BMC medical ethics
ISSN: 1472-6939
Titre abrégé: BMC Med Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088680

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 03 2019
Historique:
received: 22 10 2018
accepted: 12 03 2019
entrez: 30 3 2019
pubmed: 30 3 2019
medline: 16 8 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Large-scale linkage of international clinical datasets could lead to unique insights into disease aetiology and facilitate treatment evaluation and drug development. Hereto, multi-stakeholder consortia are currently designing several disease-specific translational research platforms to enable international health data sharing. Despite the recent adoption of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the procedures for how to govern responsible data sharing in such projects are not at all spelled out yet. In search of a first, basic outline of an ethical governance framework, we set out to explore relevant ethical principles and norms. We performed a systematic review of literature and ethical guidelines for principles and norms pertaining to data sharing for international health research. We observed an abundance of principles and norms with considerable convergence at the aggregate level of four overarching themes: societal benefits and value; distribution of risks, benefits and burdens; respect for individuals and groups; and public trust and engagement. However, at the level of principles and norms we identified substantial variation in the phrasing and level of detail, the number and content of norms considered necessary to protect a principle, and the contextual approaches in which principles and norms are used. While providing some helpful leads for further work on a coherent governance framework for data sharing, the current collection of principles and norms prompts important questions about how to streamline terminology regarding de-identification and how to harmonise the identified principles and norms into a coherent governance framework that promotes data sharing while securing public trust.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Large-scale linkage of international clinical datasets could lead to unique insights into disease aetiology and facilitate treatment evaluation and drug development. Hereto, multi-stakeholder consortia are currently designing several disease-specific translational research platforms to enable international health data sharing. Despite the recent adoption of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the procedures for how to govern responsible data sharing in such projects are not at all spelled out yet. In search of a first, basic outline of an ethical governance framework, we set out to explore relevant ethical principles and norms.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of literature and ethical guidelines for principles and norms pertaining to data sharing for international health research.
RESULTS
We observed an abundance of principles and norms with considerable convergence at the aggregate level of four overarching themes: societal benefits and value; distribution of risks, benefits and burdens; respect for individuals and groups; and public trust and engagement. However, at the level of principles and norms we identified substantial variation in the phrasing and level of detail, the number and content of norms considered necessary to protect a principle, and the contextual approaches in which principles and norms are used.
CONCLUSIONS
While providing some helpful leads for further work on a coherent governance framework for data sharing, the current collection of principles and norms prompts important questions about how to streamline terminology regarding de-identification and how to harmonise the identified principles and norms into a coherent governance framework that promotes data sharing while securing public trust.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30922290
doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0359-9
pii: 10.1186/s12910-019-0359-9
pmc: PMC6437875
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Pagination

21

Références

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Jul 08;16 Suppl 1:77
pubmed: 27410040
Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2014 Sep;18(5):597-603
pubmed: 24786336
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2014 Apr 23;2(1):1057
pubmed: 25848589
Neth Heart J. 2017 May;25(5):297-303
pubmed: 28374185
Hugo J. 2014 Dec;8(1):1
pubmed: 27090249
Health Aff (Millwood). 2018 May;37(5):702-709
pubmed: 29733719
Genome Med. 2011 Sep 28;3(9):60
pubmed: 21955348
Genome Med. 2016 Jun 23;8(1):71
pubmed: 27338147
Eur J Hum Genet. 2015 Jun;23(6):721-8
pubmed: 25248399
NPJ Genom Med. 2016 Aug 17;1(1):160241-160246
pubmed: 27990299
Front Public Health. 2016 Feb 17;4:7
pubmed: 26925395
Eur J Risk Regul. 2013 Jan 1;4(1):43-57
pubmed: 24416087
Regen Med. 2015;10(7):857-61
pubmed: 26506014
Nat Genet. 2014 Sep;46(9):934-8
pubmed: 25162809
Eur Heart J. 2018 Apr 21;39(16):1481-1495
pubmed: 29370377
Genome Med. 2017 Sep 22;9(1):84
pubmed: 28938910
Med Law Rev. 2013 Winter;21(1):71-91
pubmed: 23325780
Neuroimage. 2017 Jun;153:399-409
pubmed: 28232121
Genome Med. 2013 Nov 22;5(11):99
pubmed: 24267880
J Law Med Ethics. 2002 Summer;30(2):170-8
pubmed: 12066595
J Med Ethics. 2015 May;41(5):404-9
pubmed: 25617016
Hugo J. 2014 Dec;8(1):3
pubmed: 27090251
Hum Genet. 2011 Sep;130(3):347-56
pubmed: 21766192
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
J Proteome Res. 2009 Jul;8(7):3689-92
pubmed: 19344107
J Int Bioethique Ethique Sci. 2017 Oct 27;28(3):113-117
pubmed: 29561093
Nat Biotechnol. 2016 Nov 8;34(11):1102-1103
pubmed: 27824850
JMIR Med Inform. 2016 Jun 21;4(2):e22
pubmed: 27329087
JAMA. 2014 Feb 19;311(7):665
pubmed: 24549533
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2016 Oct;40(5):436-442
pubmed: 27625174
J Innov Health Inform. 2016 Dec 20;23(3):627-632
pubmed: 28059698
Lancet. 2016 Apr 2;387(10026):1374-1375
pubmed: 27115815
Bull World Health Organ. 2006 May;84(5):382-7
pubmed: 16710548
EGEMS (Wash DC). 2016 Mar 31;4(2):1207
pubmed: 27141520
Eur J Intern Med. 2014 Oct;25(8):681-4
pubmed: 25200801
J Am Heart Assoc. 2015 Nov 05;4(11):
pubmed: 26541391
Genome Med. 2011 Jul 14;3(7):46
pubmed: 21787442
Genet Med. 2017 Jul;19(7):721-722
pubmed: 28055021

Auteurs

Shona Kalkman (S)

Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584, CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands. s.kalkman@umcutrecht.nl.

Menno Mostert (M)

Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584, CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Christoph Gerlinger (C)

Statistics and Data Insights, Bayer AG, Berlin, Germany.
Clinic for Gynecology, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine, Saarland University Medical Center, Homburg, Saarland, Germany.

Johannes J M van Delden (JJM)

Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584, CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Ghislaine J M W van Thiel (GJMW)

Department of Medical Humanities, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Universiteitsweg 100, 3584, CG, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH