This project used Boot Camp Translation (BCT) to translate the complex medical jargon of biobanking into locally relevant evidence-based messages and materials to support increased knowledge and understanding in the local community.
Methods:
Biobank BCT was a partnership of 16 community members and 5 academic researchers. The partnership met for 8 months.
Results:
The partnership developed five main and seven submessages to assist patients and community members in making an informed decision about enrollment in a biobank.
Discussion:
The resulting messages balance an individual's right to privacy and choice, while encouraging participation for the greater good.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SwedeH, StoneCL, NorwoodAR. National population-based biobanks for genetic research. Genet Med, 2007; 9:141–149.
2.
HewittRE. Biobanking: The foundation of personalized medicine. Curr Opin Oncol, 2011; 23:112–119.
3.
De SouzaYG, GreenspanJS. Biobanking past, present and future: Responsibilities and benefits. AIDS, 2013; 27:303–312.
4.
RodenDM, PulleyJM, BasfordMA, et al.Development of a large-scale de-identified DNA biobank to enable personalized medicine. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 2008; 84:362–369.
5.
HusedzinovicA, OseD, SchickhardtC, FrohlingS, WinklerE. Stakeholders' perspectives on biobank-based genomic research: Systematic review of the literature. Eur J Hum Genet, 2015; 23:1607–1614.
6.
KaufmanDJ, Murphy-BollingerJ, ScottJ, HudsonKL. Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. Am J Hum Genet, 2009; 85:643–654.
7.
ErikssonS, HelgessonG. Potential harms, anonymization, and the right to withdraw consent to biobank research. Eur J Hum Genet, 2005; 13:1071–1076.
8.
HanssonMG, DillnerJ, BartramCR, CarlsonJA, HelgessonG. Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research?. Lancet Oncol, 2006; 7:266–269.
9.
CallierSL, MaxwellRA, MehlmanJ, et al.Ethical legal, and social implications of personalized genomic medicine research: Current literature and suggestions for the future. Bioethics, 2016; 30:698–745.
10.
NisbetMC, FahyD. Bioethics in popular science: Evaluating the media impact of the immortal life of Henrietta lacks on the biobank debate. BMC Med Ethics, 2013; 14:10.
11.
DavidSP, JohnsonSG, BergerAC, et al.Ginsburg. Making personalized health care even more personalized: Insights from activities of the IOM genomics roundtable. Ann Fam Med, 2015:373–380.
12.
HanssonMG. Ethics and biobanks. Br J Cancer, 2009; 100:8–12.
13.
WestfallJM, ZittlemanL, FelzienM, Backlund-JarquinP, TamezM, NeaseD. Reinventing the wheel of medical evidence: How the boot camp translation process is making gains. Health Affairs, 2016; 35:4.
14.
WestfallJM, ZittlemanL, FelzienM, Backlund-JarquinP, TamezM, NeaseD. Reinventing the wheel of medical evidence: How the boot camp translation process is making gains. Appendix completed boot camp translations: Topics, structure, and outcomes. Health Affairs, 2016; 35:4.
15.
NormanN, BennettC, CowartS, et al.Boot camp translation: A method for building a community of solution. J Am Board Fam Med, 2013; 26:254–263.
16.
IsraelBA, SchulzAJ, ParkerEA, BeckerAB, AllenA, GuzmanJR. Critical issues in developing and following community-based participatory research principles. In: MinklerM, WallersteinN (eds). Community-Based Participatory Research for Health. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2003: 56–73.
17.
BeskowLM, BurkeW, FullertonSM, SharpRR. Offering aggregate results to participants in genomic research: Opportunities and challenges. Genet Med, 2012; 14:490–496.
18.
WolfSM, CrockBN, Van NessB, et al.Managing incidental findings and research results in genomic research involving biobanks and archived data sets. Genet Med, 2012; 14:361–384.
19.
BeskowLM, FriedmanJY, HardyNC, LinL, WeinfurtKP. Developing a simplified consent form for biobanking. PLoS One, 2010; 5:e13302.
20.
FullertonSM, AndersonNR, GuzauskasG, FreemanD, Fryer-EdwardsK. Meeting the governance challenges of next-generation biorepository research. Sci Transl, 2010; 2:15cm3.
21.
MurphyJ, ScottJ, KaufmanD, GellerG, LeRoyL, HudsonK. Public perspectives on informed consent for biobanking. Am J Public Health, 2009; 99:2128–2134.
22.
ElgerBS, CaplanAL. Consent and anonymization in research involving biobanks: Differing terms and norms present serious barriers to an international framework. EMBO Rep, 2006; 7:661–666.
23.
ForsbergJS, HanssonMG, ErikssonS. Changing perspectives in biobank research: From individual rights to concerns about public health regarding the return of results. Eur J Hum Genet, 2009; 17:1544–1549.
