During the past decade, biobanks have been the focus of broad attention due to their potential value for scientific research and public health. China has recently made a significant investment in biobank research. Public attitudes towards biobank issues such as consent and privacy are key factors in their development. A number of studies about the public perception of biobanks in Western countries have been conducted, but little is known about the public perception of biobanks in China. This study shows that the public perception of medical research (e.g., with biobanks) is undergoing fundamental transformation in China that is yet to be acknowledged by the public authorities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChenZ, LeeL, ChenJ, CollinsR, WuF, GuoYet al.Cohort profile: The Kadoorie Study of Chronic Disease in China (KSCDC)Int J Epidemiology., 2005; 34:1243–1249.
2.
WangX, LuM, QianJ, YangY, LiS, LuDet al.Rationales, design and recruitment of the Taizhou Longitudinal Study. BMC Public Health., 2009; 9:223.
JiangC, ThomasGN, LamTH, SchoolingCM, ZhangW, LaoXet al.Cohort profile: The Guangzhou Biobank Cohort Study, a Guangzhou-Hong Kong-Birmingham collaboration. Int J Epidemiology., 2006; 35:844–852.
5.
GottweisH, ZatloukalK. Biobank governance: Trends and perspectives. Pathobiololgy., 2007; 74:206–211.
6.
Cambon-ThomsenA. The social and ethical issues of post-genomic human biobanks. Nature Reviews Gen, 2004; 5:866–873.
7.
GottweisH, ChenH, StarkbaumJ. Biobanks and the phantom public. Human Gen., 2011; 130:433–440.
8.
LipworthW, ForsythR, KerridgeI. Tissue donation to biobanks: A review of sociological studies. Sociol Health Illness, 2011; 33:792–811.
9.
WendlerD. One-time general consent for research on biological samples. Brit Med J., 2006; 332:544–547.
10.
MaY, DaiH, WangL, ZhuL, ZouH, KongX. Consent for use of clinical leftover biosample: A survey among Chinese patients and the general public. PLoS ONE, 2012; 7:e36050.
11.
LatourB. From realpolitik to dingpolitik–or how to make things public. LatourB, WeibelP. Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy. Cambridge and London: MIT Press, 2005.
12.
MarresN. The issues deserve more credit: Pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy. Soc Studies Sci., 2007; 37:759–80.
13.
KruegerR, CaseyMA. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 4th. Los Angeles: Sage, 2009.
14.
SmithsonJ. Using and analysing focus groups: Limitations and possibilities. In J Soc Res Methodol., 2000; 3:103–119.
15.
WangSS, FridingerF, SheedyKM, KhouryMJ. Public attitudes regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research. Community Gen., 2001; 4:18–26.
16.
ChenF, ShiY, XuF. An analysis of the public scientific literacy study in China. Pub Understanding Sci., 2008; 18:607–616.
17.
ZhangZ, ZhangJ. A survey of public scientific literacy in China. Pub Understanding Sci., 1993; 2:21–38.
18.
GaskellG, GottweisH. Biobanks need publicity. Nature, 2011; 471:159–171.
19.
Cambon-ThomsenA, Rial-SebbagE, KnoppersBM. Trends in ethical and legal frameworks for the use of human biobanks. Eur Respir J., 2007; 30:373–382.
20.
HoeyerK. The ethics of research biobanking. A critical review of the literature. Biotech Gen Eng Rev., 2008; 25:429–452.
21.
BabbieER. The Practice of Social Research, 12th. Welsworth Belmond, 2010.
22.
ClarkeA. Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory after the Postmodern Turn. Thousand Oaks, London and New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2005.
23.
GaskellG, GottweisH, StarkbaumJ, GerberMM, BroerseJ, GottweisUet al.Publics and biobanks:Pan-European diversity and the challenge of responsible innovation. Eur J Human Gen, 2012advance online publication6June1–7.
24.
WongCK, TangKL, LoVI. Unaffordable healthcare amid phenomenal growth: The case of healthcare protection in reform China. Int J Soc Welfare, 2007; 16:140–149.
25.
HoeyerK. Ambiguous gifts: Public anxiety, informed consent and biobanks. RichardT, OonaghC. Genetic Databases Socio-Ethical Issues in the Collection and Use of DNA. London and New York: Routledge, 2004; 97–116.
26.
Kettis-LindbladA, RingL, ViberthE, HanssonMG. Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think?Eur J Pub Health, 2006; 16:433–440.
27.
LüL. The value of the use of biotechnology: Public views in China and Europe. Pub Understanding Sci., 2009; 18:481–492.
28.
Sleeboom-FaulknerM. Human Genetic Biobanks in Asia: Politics of Trust and Scientific Advancement. London and New York Routledge, 2009.
29.
TuttonR, KayeJ, HoeyerK. Governing UK biobank: The importance of ensuring public trust. Trends Biotech., 2004; 22:284–85.
30.
WinickoffDE, WinickoffRN. The charitable trust as a model for genomic biobanks. New Eng J Med., 2003; 349:1180–1184.
31.
SungW-C. Within borders: Risks and the development of biobanking in China. Sleeboom-FaulknerM. Human Genetic Biobanks in Asia: Politics of Trust and Scientific Advancement. New York: Routledge, 2009; 168–188.
32.
LiuM, HuQ. A proposed approach to informed consent for biobanks in China. Bioethics, 2012, 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2012.01985.x.
