The Bermuda Triangle: The Pragmatics, Policies, and Principles for Data Sharing in the History of the Human Genome Project

Should Researchers Destroy Audio or Video Recordings?

It is a common practice in qualitative research to transcribe audio or video files from interviews or focus groups and then destroy the files at some future time, usually after validating the transcript or concluding the research. We argue that it is time to rethink this practice and that retention of original qualitative data-including audio and video recordings-should be the default stance in most cases.

Openness in Scientific Research: A Historical and Philosophical Perspective

Openness is widely regarded as a pillar of scientific ethics because it promotes reproducibility and progress in science and benefits society. However, the sharing of scientific information can sometimes adversely impact the interests of human research participants, human communities or populations, scientists, and private research sponsors; and may threaten national security. Because openness may conflict with other important social values, solutions to ethical and policy dilemmas should include meaningful input from those who are impacted by the sharing and use of scientific information, including research participants, communities, and the public. Data sharing and use policies should be reviewed and revised periodically to account for ongoing changes in science, technology, and society.

Aligning NIH's existing data use restrictions to the GA4GH DUO standard

It is widely accepted that large-scale genomic data (e.g., whole-genome sequencing, whole-exome sequencing, and genome-wide association study data) be shared through a controlled-access mechanism. This protects the privacy of research participants and ensures downstream uses of data align with participants' informed consent regarding future sharing of their data. In 2019, GA4GH approved the Data Use Ontology (DUO) standard to define data use terms with machine-readable representations to represent how a dataset can be used. We endeavored to determine the parity of existing data use restrictions ("Data Use Limitations" [DULs]) for datasets registered in the National Institutes of Health database for Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP) with the DUO standard. We found substantial (93%) parity between the dbGaP DULs (n = 3,575) and DUO. This study demonstrates the comprehensiveness of the DUO standard and encourages data stewards to standardize data use restrictions in machine-readable formats to facilitate data sharing.

Lampreys and spinal cord regeneration: "a very special claim on the interest of zoologists," 1830s-present

Employing history of science methods, including analyses of the scientific literature, archival documents, and interviews with scientists, this paper presents a history of lampreys in neurobiology from the 1830s to the present. We emphasize the lamprey's roles in helping to elucidate spinal cord regeneration mechanisms. Two attributes have long perpetuated studies of lampreys in neurobiology. First, they possess large neurons, including multiple classes of stereotypically located, 'identified' giant neurons in the brain, which project their large axons into the spinal cord. These giant neurons and their axonal fibers have facilitated electrophysiological recordings and imaging across biological scales, ranging from molecular to circuit-level analyses of nervous system structures and functions and including their roles in behavioral output. Second, lampreys have long been considered amongst the most basal extant vertebrates on the planet, so they have facilitated comparative studies pointing to conserved and derived characteristics of vertebrate nervous systems. These features attracted neurologists and zoologists to studies of lampreys between the 1830s and 1930s. But, the same two attributes also facilitated the rise of the lamprey in neural regeneration research after 1959, when biologists first wrote about the spontaneous, robust regeneration of some identified CNS axons in larvae after spinal cord injuries, coupled with recovery of normal swimming. Not only did large neurons promote fresh insights in the field, enabling studies incorporating multiple scales with existing and new technologies. But investigators also were able to attach a broad scope of relevance to their studies, interpreting them as suggesting conserved features of successful, and sometimes even unsuccessful, CNS regeneration. Lamprey research demonstrated that functional recovery takes place without the reformation of the original neuronal connections, for instance, by way of imperfect axonal regrowth and compensatory plasticity. Moreover, research performed in the lamprey model revealed that factors intrinsic to neurons are integral in promoting or hindering regeneration. As this work has helped illuminate why basal vertebrates accomplish CNS regeneration so well, whereas mammals do it so poorly, this history presents a case study in how biological and medical value have been, and could continue to be, gleaned from a non-traditional model organism for which molecular tools have been developed only relatively recently.

New Meanings in the Archive: Privacy, Technological Change and the Status of Sources

This essay reflects on how technological changes in biomedicine can affect what archival sources are available for historical research. Historians and anthropologists have examined the ways in which old biomedical samples can be made to serve novel scientific purposes, such as when decades-old frozen tissue specimens are analyzed using new genomic techniques. Those uses are also affected by shifting ethical regimes, which affect who can do what with old samples, or whether anything can be done with them at all. Archival collections are subject to similar dynamics, as institutional change and shifts in ethical guidelines and privacy laws affect which sources can be accessed and which are closed. I witnessed just such a change during my research into human genetics using archives in the Wellcome Collection. A few years into my project, those archives had their privacy conditions reassessed, and I saw how some sources previously seen as neutral were now understood to contain personal sensitive information. This paper describes the conditions of this shift-including the effects of technological change, new ethical considerations, and changing laws around privacy. I reflect on how these affected my understanding of the history of human genetics, and how I and others might narrate it.

Operationalizing "One Health" as "One Digital Health" Through a Global Framework That Emphasizes Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits From the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Related Digital Technologies

The operationalization of One Health (OH) through digitalization is a means to deploy digital technologies (including Artificial Intelligence (AI), big data and related digital technologies) to better capacitate us to deal with growing climate exigency and related threats to human, animal and plant health. With reference to the concept of One Digital Health (ODH), this paper considers how digital capabilities can help to overcome ‘operational brakes’ in OH through new and deeper insights, better predictions, and more targeted or precise preventive strategies and public health countermeasures. However, the data landscape is fragmented and access to certain types of data is increasingly restrictive as individuals, communities and countries seek to assert greater control over data taken from them. This paper proposes for a dedicated global ODH framework—centered on fairness and equity—to be established to promote data-sharing across all the key knowledge domains of OH and to devise data-driven solutions to challenges in the human-animal-ecosystems interface. It first considers the data landscape in relation to: (1) Human and population health; (2) Pathogens; (3) Animal and plant health; and (4) Ecosystems and biodiversity. The complexification from the application of advance genetic sequencing technology is then considered, with focus on current debates over whether certain types of data like digital (genetic) sequencing information (DSI) should remain openly and freely accessible. The proposed ODH framework must augment the existing access and benefit sharing (ABS) framework currently prescribed under the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in at least three different ways. First, the ODH framework should apply to all genetic resources and data, including DSI, whether from humans or non-humans. Second, the FAIRER principles should be implemented, with focus on fair and equitable benefit-sharing. Third, the ODH framework should adopt multilateral approaches to data sharing (such as through federated data systems) and to ABS. By operationalizing OH as ODH, we are more likely to be able to protect and restore natural habitats, secure the health and well-being of all living things, and thereby realize the goals set out in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework under the CBD.

The Structural Shift and Collaboration Capacity in GenBank Networks: A Longitudinal Study

Metadata in scientific data repositories such as GenBank contain links between data submissions and related publications. As a new data source for studying collaboration networks, metadata in data repositories compensate for the limitations of publication-based research on collaboration networks. This paper reports the findings from a GenBank metadata analytics project. We used network science methods to uncover the structures and dynamics of GenBank collaboration networks from 1992–2018. The longitudinality and large scale of this data collection allowed us to unravel the evolution history of collaboration networks and identify the trend of flattening network structures over time and optimal assortative mixing range for enhancing collaboration capacity. By incorporating metadata from the data production stage with the publication stage, we uncovered new characteristics of collaboration networks as well as developed new metrics for assessing the effectiveness of enablers of collaboration—scientific and technical human capital, cyberinfrastructure, and science policy.

Balancing openness with Indigenous data sovereignty: An opportunity to leave no one behind in the journey to sequence all of life

The field of genomics has benefited greatly from its “openness” approach to data sharing. However, with the increasing volume of sequence information being created and stored and the growing number of international genomics efforts, the equity of openness is under question. The United Nations Convention of Biodiversity aims to develop and adopt a standard policy on access and benefit-sharing for sequence information across signatory parties. This standardization will have profound implications on genomics research, requiring a new definition of open data sharing. The redefinition of openness is not unwarranted, as its limitations have unintentionally introduced barriers of engagement to some, including Indigenous Peoples. This commentary provides an insight into the key challenges of openness faced by the researchers who aspire to protect and conserve global biodiversity, including Indigenous flora and fauna, and presents immediate, practical solutions that, if implemented, will equip the genomics community with both the diversity and inclusivity required to respectfully protect global biodiversity.

Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?

Research, innovation, and progress in the life sciences are increasingly contingent on access to large quantities of data. This is one of the key premises behind the "open science" movement and the global calls for fostering the sharing of personal data, datasets, and research results. This paper reports on the outcomes of discussions by the panel "Open science, data sharing and solidarity: who benefits?" held at the 2021 Biennial conference of the International Society for the History, Philosophy, and Social Studies of Biology (ISHPSSB), and hosted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL).

John Sulston (1942-2018): a personal perspective

John Sulston changed the way we do science, not once, but three times - initially with the complete cell lineage of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, next with completion of the genome sequences of the worm and human genomes and finally with his strong and active advocacy for open data sharing. His contributions were widely recognized and in 2002 he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine.

Complicated legacies: The human genome at 20

Millions of people today have access to their personal genomic information. Direct-to-consumer services and integration with other “big data” increasingly commoditize what was rightly celebrated as a singular achievement in February 2001 when the first draft human genomes were published. But such remarkable technical and scientific progress has not been without its share of missteps and growing pains. Science invited the experts below to help explore how we got here and where we should (or ought not) be going.

Researcher Perspectives on Data Sharing in Deep Brain Stimulation

The expansion of research on deep brain stimulation (DBS) and adaptive DBS (aDBS) raises important neuroethics and policy questions related to data sharing. However, there has been little empirical research on the perspectives of experts developing these technologies. We conducted semi-structured, open-ended interviews with aDBS researchers regarding their data sharing practices and their perspectives on ethical and policy issues related to sharing. Researchers expressed support for and a commitment to sharing, with most saying that they were either sharing their data or would share in the future and that doing so was important for advancing the field. However, those who are sharing reported a variety of sharing partners, suggesting heterogeneity in sharing practices and lack of the broad sharing that would reflect principles of open science. Researchers described several concerns and barriers related to sharing, including privacy and confidentiality, the usability of shared data by others, ownership and control of data (including potential commercialization), and limited resources for sharing. They also suggested potential solutions to these challenges, including additional safeguards to address privacy issues, standardization and transparency in analysis to address issues of data usability, professional norms and heightened cooperation to address issues of ownership and control, and streamlining of data transmission to address resource limitations. Researchers also offered a range of views on the sensitivity of neural activity data (NAD) and data related to mental health in the context of sharing. These findings are an important input to deliberations by researchers, policymakers, neuroethicists, and other stakeholders as they navigate ethics and policy questions related to aDBS research.

Advancing Science while Training Undergraduates: Recommendations from a Collaborative Biology Research Network

Biology research is becoming increasingly dependent on large-scale, "big data," networked research initiatives. At the same time, there has been a corresponding effort to expand undergraduate participation in research to benefit student learning and persistence in science. This essay examines the confluence of this trend through eight years of a collaboration within a successful biology research network that explicitly incorporates undergraduates into large-scale scientific research. We draw upon interviews with faculty in this network to consider the interplay of scientific and pedagogical objectives at the heart of this undergraduate-focused network research project. We identify ways that this network has expanded and diversified access to scientific knowledge production for faculty and students and examine a goal conflict that emerged around the dual objectives of mentoring emerging scientists while producing high-quality scientific data for the larger biology community. Based on lessons learned within this network, we provide three recommendations that can support institutions and faculty engaging in networked research projects with undergraduates: (1) establish rigorous protocols to ensure data and database quality, (2) protect personnel time to coordinate network and scientific processes, and (3) select appropriate partners and establish explicit expectations for specific collaborations.

Credit for and Control of Research Outputs in Genomic Citizen Science

Citizen science encompasses activities with scientific objectives in which members of the public participate as more than passive research subjects from whom personal data or biospecimens are collected and analyzed by others. Citizen science is increasingly common in the biomedical sciences, including the fields of genetics and human genomics. Genomic citizen science initiatives are diverse and involve citizen scientists in collecting genetic data, solving genetic puzzles, and conducting experiments in community laboratories. At the same time that genomic citizen science is presenting new opportunities for individuals to participate in scientific discovery, it is also challenging norms regarding the manner in which scientific research outputs are managed. In this review, we present a typology of genomic citizen science initiatives, describe ethical and legal foundations for recognizing genomic citizen scientists' claims of credit for and control of research outputs, and detail how such claims are or might be addressed in practice across a variety of initiatives.

(Inter)nationalising the antibiotic research and development pipeline

In this Personal View, we critically examine the wider context of international efforts to stimulate commercial antibiotic research and development via public-private initiatives. Despite these efforts, antibiotics remain a global resource without an international support structure that is commensurate to the risks from antibiotic-resistant infections and the long-term nature of required solutions. To protect this resource, we propose a two-pronged antibiotic research and development strategy based on a short-term strengthening of incentives (such as market entry rewards) to maximise the delivery of existing opportunities in the pipeline, and on a concurrent medium-term to long-term establishment of a global, publicly funded antibiotic research and development institute. Designed sustainably to deliver novel and first-in-class antibiotics targeting key human health gaps, the institute and its staff would become a global resource that, unlike the private pharmaceutical sector, would be managed as an open science platform. Our model of internationalised public research and development would maximise scientific synergy and cross-fertilisation, minimise replication of effort, acquire and preserve existing know-how, and ensure equitable and sustainable access to novel and effective antibiotics. Its genuinely global focus would also help counteract tendencies to equate donor with global health priorities. Our proposal is not radical. Historical precedent and developments in other research areas show that sustained international funding of publicly owned research can hasten the delivery of critically needed drugs and lower barriers to access.

Genome sequencing-the dawn of a game-changing era

The development of genome sequencing technologies has revolutionized the biological sciences in ways which could not have been imagined at the time. This article sets out to document the dawning of the age of genomics and to consider the impact of this revolution on biological investigation, our understanding of life, and the relationship between science and society.