Citations of:
Introduction: Sharing Data in a Medical Information Commons
Amy L. McGuire, Mary A. Majumder, Angela G. Villanueva, Jessica Bardill, Juli M. Bollinger, Eric Boerwinkle, Tania Bubela, Patricia A. Deverka, Barbara J. Evans, Nanibaa' A. Garrison, David Glazer, Melissa M. Goldstein, Henry T. Greely, Scott D. Kahn, Bartha M. Knoppers, Barbara A. Koenig, J. Mark Lambright, John E. Mattison, Christopher O'Donnell, Arti K. Rai, Laura L. Rodriguez, Tania Simoncelli, Sharon F. Terry, Adrian M. Thorogood, Michael S. Watson, John T. Wilbanks & Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 47 (1):12-20 (2019)
Add citations
You must login to add citations.
|
|
No categories |
|
|
|
Population-level biomedical research offers new opportunities to improve population health, but also raises new challenges to traditional systems of research governance and ethical oversight. Partly in response to these challenges, various models of public involvement in research are being introduced. Yet, the ways in which public involvement should meet governance challenges are not well understood. We conducted a qualitative study with 36 experts and stakeholders using the World Café method to identify key governance challenges and explore how public involvement can (...) |
|
Precision medicine is an emerging approach to treatment and disease prevention that relies on linkages between very large datasets of health information that is shared amongst researchers and health professionals. While studies suggest broad support for sharing precision medicine data with researchers at publicly funded institutions, there is reluctance to share health information with private industry for research and development. As the private sector is likely to play an important role in generating public benefits from precision medicine initiatives, it is (...) No categories |
|
A 2011 National Academies of Sciences report called for an “Information Commons” and a “Knowledge Network” to revolutionize biomedical research and clinical care. We interviewed 41 expert stakeholders to examine governance, access, data collection, and privacy in the context of a medical information commons. Stakeholders' attitudes about MICs align with the NAS vision of an Information Commons; however, differences of opinion regarding clinical use and access warrant further research to explore policy and technological solutions. |