Understanding the value of biobank attributes to researchers using a conjoint experiment.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 Dec 2023
20 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
24
05
2023
accepted:
07
12
2023
medline:
21
12
2023
pubmed:
21
12
2023
entrez:
20
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Biobanks are important in biomedical and public health research, and future healthcare research relies on their strength and capacity. However, there are financial challenges related to the operation of commercial biobanks and concerns around the commercialization of biobanks. Non-commercial biobanks depend on grant funding to operate and could be valuable to researchers if they can enable access to quality specimens at lower costs. The objective of this study is to estimate the value of specific biobank attributes. We used a rating-based conjoint experiment approach to study how researchers valued handling fee, access, quality, characterization, breadth of consent, access to key endemics, and time taken to fulfil requests. We found that researchers placed the greatest relative importance on the quality of specimens (26%), followed by the characterization of specimens (21%). Researchers with prior experience purchasing biological samples also valued access to key endemic in-country sites (11.6%) and low handling fees (5.5%) in biobanks.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38123601
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-49394-6
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-49394-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
22728Subventions
Organisme : CDC HHS
ID : 21IPA2113462
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Annaratone, L. et al. Basic principles of biobanking: From biological samples to precision medicine for patients. Virchows Arch. 479, 233–246 (2021).
doi: 10.1007/s00428-021-03151-0
pubmed: 34255145
pmcid: 8275637
Brand, A. M. & Probst-Hensch, N. M. Biobanking for epidemiological research and public health. Pathobiology 74, 227–238 (2007).
doi: 10.1159/000104450
pubmed: 17709965
Castillo-Pelayo, T., Babinszky, S., LeBlanc, J. & Watson, P. H. The importance of biobanking in cancer research. Biopreserv. Biobank. 13, 172–177 (2015).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2014.0061
pubmed: 26035006
Morente, M. M., Fernández, P. L. & de Alava, E. Biobanking: old activity or young discipline?. Semin. Diagn. Pathol. 25, 317–322 (2008).
doi: 10.1053/j.semdp.2008.07.007
pubmed: 19013897
Padmanabhan, S. Pharmacogenomics and stratified medicine (ed. Padmanabhan, S.) 3–25 (Academic Press, 2014).
Riegman, P. H. J., Morente, M. M., Betsou, F., de Blasio, P. & Geary, P. Biobanking for better healthcare. Mol. Oncol. 2, 213–222 (2008).
doi: 10.1016/j.molonc.2008.07.004
pubmed: 19383342
pmcid: 5527804
Rush, A. et al. Improving academic biobank value and sustainability through an outputs focus. Value Health 23, 1072–1078 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.05.010
pubmed: 32828220
Zielhuis, G. A. Biobanking for epidemiology. Public Health 126, 214–216 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.puhe.2011.12.007
pubmed: 22325670
Bagcchi, S. Biobanking: New technique could revolutionize universal health. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/02/does-biobanking-hold-the-key-to-achieving-universal-health/ (2022).
Baláž, V., Jeck, T. & Balog, M. Economics of biobanking: Business or public good? Literature review. Struct. Them. Anal. Soc. Sci. 11, 288 (2022).
Albert, M., Bartlett, J., Johnston, R. N., Schacter, B. & Watson, P. Biobank bootstrapping: Is biobank sustainability possible through cost recovery?. Biopreserv. Biobank. 12, 374–380 (2014).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2014.0051
pubmed: 25496148
Macheiner, T., Huppertz, B., Bayer, M. & Sargsyan, K. Challenges and driving forces for business plans in biobanking. Biopreserv. Biobank. 15, 121–125 (2017).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2017.0018
pubmed: 28338345
Sargsyan, K. et al. Sustainability in biobanking: Model of biobank Graz. Biopreserv. Biobank. 13, 410–420 (2015).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2015.0087
pubmed: 26697910
Turner, A., Dallaire-Fortier, C. & Murtagh, M. J. Biobank economics and the “commercialization problem”. Spontaneous Gener. J. Hist. Philos. Sci. 7, 69–80 (2013).
Critchley, C. R. et al. Identifying the nature and extent of public and donor concern about the commercialisation of biobanks for genomic research. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 29, 503–511 (2021).
doi: 10.1038/s41431-020-00746-0
pubmed: 33479473
pmcid: 7940627
Riso, B. “Not storing the samples it’s certainly not a good service for patients”: Constructing the biobank as a health place. Societies 12, 113 (2022).
doi: 10.3390/soc12040113
Widdows, H. & Cordell, S. The ethics of biobanking: Key issues and controversies. Health Care Anal. 19, 207–219 (2011).
doi: 10.1007/s10728-011-0184-x
pubmed: 21779971
Mora, M. et al. The EuroBioBank Network: 10 years of hands-on experience of collaborative, transnational biobanking for rare diseases. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 23, 1116–1123 (2015).
doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.272
pubmed: 25537360
Gonzalez-Sanchez, M. B., Lopez-Valeiras, E., Morente, M. M. & Fernández Lago, O. Cost model for biobanks. Biopreserv. Biobank. 11, 272–277 (2013).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2013.0021
pubmed: 24835258
Somiari, S. B. & Somiari, R. I. The future of biobanking: A conceptual look at how biobanks can respond to the growing human biospecimen needs of researchers. In Biobanking in the 21st Century (ed. Karimi-Busheri, F.) 11–27 (Springer International Publishing, 2015).
doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-20579-3_2
Rodriguez Llorian, E. et al. A rapid review on the value of biobanks containing genetic information. Value Health 26, 1286–1295 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2023.02.017
pubmed: 36921900
Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J. & Yamamoto, T. Causal inference in conjoint analysis: Understanding multidimensional choices via stated preference experiments. Polit. Anal. 22, 1–30 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/pan/mpt024
Luce, R. D. & Tukey, J. W. Simultaneous conjoint measurement: A new type of fundamental measurement. J. Math. Psychol. 1, 1–27 (1964).
doi: 10.1016/0022-2496(64)90015-X
Strezhnev, A., Hainmueller, J., Hopkins, D. J. & Yamamoto, T. Conjoint Survey Design Tool: Software Manual (2013).
van den Broek-Altenburg, E. & Atherly, A. Using discrete choice experiments to measure preferences for hard to observe choice attributes to inform health policy decisions. Health Econ. Rev. 10, 18 (2020).
doi: 10.1186/s13561-020-00276-x
pubmed: 32529586
pmcid: 7291477
Nkengasong, J. N. & Tessema, S. K. Africa needs a new public health order to tackle infectious disease threats. Cell 183, 296–300 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.09.041
pubmed: 33064983
pmcid: 7560261
Owolabi, M. O. et al. Maximising human health and development through synergistic partnerships: The African Biobank and Longitudinal Epidemiological Ecosystem. Lancet Glob. Health 11, e1333–e1334 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00303-0
pubmed: 37591576
Africa CDC. Establishment of a Biobanking Network as a Sustainable Mechanism to Accelerate Development and Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests in Africa. Africa CDC. https://africacdc.org/download/establishment-of-a-biobanking-network-as-a-sustainable-mechanism-to-accelerate-development-and-evaluation-of-diagnostic-tests-in-africa/ (2020).
Peeling, R. W., Boeras, D., Wilder-Smith, A., Sall, A. & Nkengasong, J. Need for sustainable biobanking networks for COVID-19 and other diseases of epidemic potential. Lancet Infect. Dis. 20, e268–e273 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30461-8
pubmed: 32717208
pmcid: 7380944
Rovere-Querini, P. et al. Biobanking for COVID-19 research. Panminerva Med. 64, 244–252 (2022).
doi: 10.23736/S0031-0808.20.04168-3
pubmed: 33073557
Zhang, L. & Guo, H. Biomarkers of COVID-19 and technologies to combat SARS-CoV-2. Adv. Biomark. Sci. Technol. 2, 1–23 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.abst.2020.08.001
pubmed: 33511330
pmcid: 7435336
Fossati, A. et al. Towards comprehensive plasma proteomics by orthogonal protease digestion. J. Proteome Res. 20, 4031–4040 (2021).
doi: 10.1021/acs.jproteome.1c00357
pubmed: 34319755
pmcid: 8442619
Tan, A. F. et al. Diagnostic accuracy and limit of detection of ten malaria parasite lactate dehydrogenase-based rapid tests for Plasmodium knowlesi and P. falciparum. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 12, 1023219 (2022).
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.1023219
pubmed: 36325471
pmcid: 9618705
Kamulegeya, R. et al. Biobanking: Strengthening Uganda’s rapid response to COVID-19 and other epidemics. Biopreserv. Biobank. 20, 238–243 (2022).
doi: 10.1089/bio.2021.0022
pubmed: 34597189
Arroyo, R. et al. Conjoint analysis to understand preferences of patients with multiple sclerosis for disease-modifying therapy attributes in Spain: A cross-sectional observational study. BMJ Open 7, e014433 (2017).
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014433
pubmed: 28274968
pmcid: 5353311
Pullman, D. et al. Personal privacy, public benefits, and biobanks: A conjoint analysis of policy priorities and public perceptions. Genet. Med. 14, 229–235 (2012).
doi: 10.1038/gim.0b013e31822e578f
pubmed: 22261752