Ethical aspects of human biobanks: a systematic review
2011

Ethical Aspects of Human Biobanks: A Systematic Review

Sample size: 154 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Budimir Danijela, Polašek Ozren, Marušić Ana, Kolčić Ivana, Zemunik Tatijana, Boraska Vesna, Jerončić Ana, Boban Mladen, Campbell Harry, Rudan Igor

Primary Institution: University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia

Hypothesis

To systematically assess the existing literature on ethical aspects of human biobanks.

Conclusion

The focus on ethical aspects is strongly present throughout the biobanking research field, and ongoing discussions are necessary as new ethical issues continue to arise.

Supporting Evidence

  • The review included 154 studies that discussed various ethical issues in biobanking.
  • Most studies focused on informed consent, privacy, and the return of results to participants.
  • Over half of the studies were published in 2009 or 2010, indicating a recent surge in interest in biobanking ethics.
  • Ethical issues in biobanking are evolving and require ongoing discussion as new challenges arise.

Takeaway

This study looked at how researchers think about the ethics of biobanks, which are places that store human samples for research. It found that there are many important questions about consent and privacy that need to be talked about more.

Methodology

The study involved a systematic literature search in the Web of Science and PubMed databases to identify articles discussing ethical issues in biobanks, analyzing 154 relevant studies.

Potential Biases

The majority of studies were from developed countries, which may not represent global perspectives on biobanking ethics.

Limitations

The review is limited to articles published until November 2010 and primarily reflects perspectives from highly developed countries.

Participant Demographics

Most studies were conducted in highly developed countries, particularly the USA, UK, Canada, Sweden, and Denmark.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.3325/cmj.2011.52.262

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication