1
|
Bernier A, Molnár-Gábor F, Knoppers BM, Borry P, Cesar PMDG, Devriendt T, Goisauf M, Murtagh M, Jiménez PN, Recuero M, Rial-Sebbag E, Shabani M, Wilson RC, Zaccagnini D, Maxwell L. Reconciling the biomedical data commons and the GDPR: three lessons from the EUCAN ELSI collaboratory. Eur J Hum Genet 2024; 32:69-76. [PMID: 37322132 PMCID: PMC10267538 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01403-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2022] [Revised: 01/26/2023] [Accepted: 05/24/2023] [Indexed: 06/17/2023] Open
Abstract
The coming-into-force of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is a watershed moment in the legal recognition of enforceable rights to informational self-determination. The rapid evolution of legal requirements applicable to data use, however, has the potential to outstrip the capabilities of networks of biomedical data users to respond to the shifting norms. It can also delegitimate established institutional bodies that are responsible for assessing and authorising the downstream use of data, including research ethics committees and institutional data custodians. These burdens are especially pronounced for clinical and research networks that are of transnational scale, because the legal compliance burden for outbound international data transfers from the EEA is especially high. Legislatures, courts, and regulators in the EU should therefore implement the following three legal changes. First, the responsibilities of particular actors in a data sharing network should be delimited through the contractual allocation of responsibilities between collaborators. Second, the use of data through secure data processing environments should not trigger the international transfer provisions of the GDPR. Third, the use of federated data analysis methodologies that do not provide analysis nodes or downstream users access to identifiable personal data as part of the outputs of those analyses should not be considered circumstances of joint controllership, nor lead to the users of non-identifiable data to be considered controllers or processors. These small clarifications of, or modifications to, the GDPR would facilitate the exchange of biomedical data amongst clinicians and researchers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander Bernier
- EUCANCan: European-Canadian Cancer Network, Barcelona, Spain.
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain.
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Montréal, QC, Canada.
| | - Fruzsina Molnár-Gábor
- EUCANCan: European-Canadian Cancer Network, Barcelona, Spain
- Heidelberg Academy of Sciences and Humanities, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Bartha M Knoppers
- EUCANCan: European-Canadian Cancer Network, Barcelona, Spain
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, McGill University Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Montréal, QC, Canada
| | - Pascal Borry
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Priscilla M D G Cesar
- Institute on Ethics & Policy for Innovation (IEPI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
- RECODID: Reconciliation of Cohort Data in Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Thijs Devriendt
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Melanie Goisauf
- ELSI Services & Research, BBMRI-ERIC, Graz, Austria
- CINECA: Common Infrastructure for International Cohorts in Europe, Canada, and Africa, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Madeleine Murtagh
- EUCAN-Connect: Federated, FAIR Platform Enabling Large-Scale Analysis of High-Value Cohort Data Connecting Europe and Canada in Personalized Health, Groningen, the Netherlands
- School of Social and Political Studies, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Scotland, UK
| | - Pilar Nicolás Jiménez
- EUCANCan: European-Canadian Cancer Network, Barcelona, Spain
- EuCanImage: A European Cancer Image Platform Linked to Biological and Health Data for Next Generation Artificial Intelligence and Precision Medicine in Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
- Social and Legal Sciences Applied to the New Technosciences Research Group, Faculty of Law, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Mikel Recuero
- EUCANCan: European-Canadian Cancer Network, Barcelona, Spain
- EuCanImage: A European Cancer Image Platform Linked to Biological and Health Data for Next Generation Artificial Intelligence and Precision Medicine in Oncology, Barcelona, Spain
- Social and Legal Sciences Applied to the New Technosciences Research Group, Faculty of Law, University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Emmanuelle Rial-Sebbag
- CINECA: Common Infrastructure for International Cohorts in Europe, Canada, and Africa, Heidelberg, Germany
- CERPOP, Inserm, Toulouse Paul Sabatier University, Toulouse, France
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain
- Metamedica, Faculty of Law and Criminology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Rebecca C Wilson
- EUCAN-Connect: Federated, FAIR Platform Enabling Large-Scale Analysis of High-Value Cohort Data Connecting Europe and Canada in Personalized Health, Groningen, the Netherlands
- Institute of Population Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
| | - Davide Zaccagnini
- euCanSHare: An EU-Canada Joint Infrastructure for Next-Generation Multi-Heart Research, Barcelona, Spain
- Lynkeus S.R.L, Roma, Italy
| | - Lauren Maxwell
- RECODID: Reconciliation of Cohort Data in Infectious Diseases, Heidelberg, Germany
- Heidelberg Institute for Global Health, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130/3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Devriendt T, Shabani M, Borry P. Reward systems for cohort data sharing: An interview study with funding agencies. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0282969. [PMID: 36961773 PMCID: PMC10038295 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282969] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2022] [Accepted: 02/28/2023] [Indexed: 03/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Data infrastructures are being constructed to facilitate cohort data sharing. These infrastructures are anticipated to increase the rate of data sharing. However, the lack of data sharing has also been framed as being the consequence of the lack of reputational or financial incentives for sharing. Some initiatives try to confer value onto data sharing by making researchers' individual contributions to research visible (i.e., contributorship) or by quantifying the degree to which research data has been shared (e.g., data indicators). So far, the role of downstream evaluation and funding distribution systems for reputational incentives remains underexplored. This interview study documents the perspectives of members of funding agencies on, amongst other elements, incentives for data sharing. Funding agencies are adopting narrative CVs to encourage evaluation of diverse research outputs and display diversity in researchers' profiles. This was argued to diminish the focus on quantitative indicators of scientific productivity. Indicators related to open science dimensions may be reintroduced if they are fully developed. Shifts towards contributorship models for research outputs are seen as complementary to narrative review.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- Faculty of Law and Criminology, METAMEDICA, UGent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Devriendt T, Borry P, Shabani M. Credit and Recognition for Contributions to Data-Sharing Platforms Among Cohort Holders and Platform Developers in Europe: Interview Study. J Med Internet Res 2022; 24:e25983. [PMID: 35023849 PMCID: PMC8796038 DOI: 10.2196/25983] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2020] [Revised: 03/14/2021] [Accepted: 11/19/2021] [Indexed: 12/22/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The European Commission is funding projects that aim to establish data-sharing platforms. These platforms are envisioned to enhance and facilitate the international sharing of cohort data. Nevertheless, broad data sharing may be restricted by the lack of adequate recognition for those who share data. Objective The aim of this study is to describe in depth the concerns about acquiring credit for data sharing within epidemiological research. Methods A total of 17 participants linked to European Union–funded data-sharing platforms were recruited for a semistructured interview. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Results Interviewees argued that data sharing within international projects could challenge authorship guidelines in multiple ways. Some respondents considered that the acquisition of credit for articles with extensive author lists could be problematic in some instances, such as for junior researchers. In addition, universities may be critical of researchers who share data more often than leading research. Some considered that the evaluation system undervalues data generators and specialists. Respondents generally looked favorably upon alternatives to the current evaluation system to potentially ameliorate these issues. Conclusions The evaluation system might impede data sharing because it mainly focuses on first and last authorship and undervalues the contributor’s work. Further movement of crediting models toward contributorship could potentially address this issue. Appropriate crediting mechanisms that are better aligned with the way science ought to be conducted in the future need to be developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- Metamedica, Faculty of Law and Criminology, UGent, Gent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Devriendt T, Ammann C, W. Asselbergs F, Bernier A, Costas R, Friedrich MG, Gelpi JL, Jarvelin MR, Kuulasmaa K, Lekadir K, Mayrhofer MT, Papez V, Pasterkamp G, Petersen SE, Schmidt CO, Schulz-Menger J, Söderberg S, Shabani M, Veronesi G, Viezzer DS, Borry P. An agenda-setting paper on data sharing platforms: euCanSHare workshop. Open Res Eur 2021; 1:80. [PMID: 37645200 PMCID: PMC10445835 DOI: 10.12688/openreseurope.13860.2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/22/2021] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
Abstract
Various data sharing platforms are being developed to enhance the sharing of cohort data by addressing the fragmented state of data storage and access systems. However, policy challenges in several domains remain unresolved. The euCanSHare workshop was organized to identify and discuss these challenges and to set the future research agenda. Concerns over the multiplicity and long-term sustainability of platforms, lack of resources, access of commercial parties to medical data, credit and recognition mechanisms in academia and the organization of data access committees are outlined. Within these areas, solutions need to be devised to ensure an optimal functioning of platforms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Clemens Ammann
- Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the Max-Delbrück-Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
| | - Folkert W. Asselbergs
- Department of Cardiology, Division Heart & Lungs, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Institute of Cardiovascular Science, Faculty of Population Health Sciences, University College London, London, UK
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK
- Health Data Research UK, London, UK
| | - Alexander Bernier
- Centre of Genomics and Policy, Faculty of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
| | - Rodrigo Costas
- Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Matthias G. Friedrich
- Departments of Medicine and Diagnostic Radiology, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada
| | - Josep L. Gelpi
- Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biomedicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
- Barcelona Supercomputing Center (BSC), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marjo-Riitta Jarvelin
- Department of Life Sciences, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, London, UK
- MRC-PHE Centre for Environment and Health, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
- Center for Life Course Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland
- Unit of Primary Health Care, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland
| | - Kari Kuulasmaa
- National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Karim Lekadir
- Artificial Intelligence in Medicine Lab (BCN-AIM), Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Vaclav Papez
- Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK
- Health Data Research UK, London, UK
| | - Gerard Pasterkamp
- Department of Clinical Diagnostics Laboratories, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Steffen E. Petersen
- Health Data Research UK, London, UK
- Barts Heart Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- William Harvey Research Institute, NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- The Alan Turing Institute, London, UK
| | - Carsten Oliver Schmidt
- Institute for Community Medicine, Department SHIP-KEF, Greifswald University Medical Center, Greifswald, Germany
| | - Jeanette Schulz-Menger
- Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the Max-Delbrück-Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research) partner site, Berlin, Germany
- Department of Cardiology and Nephrology, HELIOS Hospital Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Stefan Söderberg
- Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Heart Centre, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- METAMEDICA, Department of Law and Criminology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Giovanni Veronesi
- Research Center in Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine (EPIMED), Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria in Varese, Varese, Italy
| | - Darian Steven Viezzer
- Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Experimental and Clinical Research Center, a joint cooperation between the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin and the Max-Delbrück-Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
- DZHK (German Centre for Cardiovascular Research) partner site, Berlin, Germany
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Devriendt T, Borry P, Shabani M. Factors that influence data sharing through data sharing platforms: A qualitative study on the views and experiences of cohort holders and platform developers. PLoS One 2021; 16:e0254202. [PMID: 34214146 PMCID: PMC8253381 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254202] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2020] [Accepted: 06/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Infrastructures are being developed to enhance and facilitate the sharing of cohort data internationally. However, empirical studies show that many barriers impede sharing data broadly. Purpose Therefore, our aim is to describe the barriers and concerns for the sharing of cohort data, and the implications for data sharing platforms. Methods Seventeen participants involved in developing data sharing platforms or tied to cohorts that are to be submitted to platforms were recruited for semi-structured interviews to share views and experiences regarding data sharing. Results Credit and recognition, the potential misuse of data, loss of control, lack of resources, socio-cultural factors and ethical and legal barriers are elements that influence decisions on data sharing. Core values underlying these reasons are equality, reciprocity, trust, transparency, gratification and beneficence. Conclusions Data generators might use data sharing platforms primarily for collaborative modes of working and network building. Data generators might be unwilling to contribute and share for non-collaborative work, or if no financial resources are provided for sharing data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
- * E-mail:
| | - Pascal Borry
- Faculty of Medicine, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- Faculty of Law and Criminology, Metamedica, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abstract
Background: The lack of incentives has been described as the rate-limiting step for data sharing. Currently, the evaluation of scientific productivity by academic institutions and funders has been heavily reliant upon the number of publications and citations, raising questions about the adequacy of such mechanisms to reward data generation and sharing. This article provides a systematic review of the current and proposed incentive mechanisms for researchers in biomedical sciences and discusses their strengths and weaknesses. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were queried for original research articles, editorials, and opinion articles on incentives for data sharing. Articles were included if they discussed incentive mechanisms for data sharing, were applicable to biomedical sciences, and were written in English. Results: Although coauthorship in return for the sharing of data is common, this might be incompatible with authorship guidelines and raise concerns over the ability of secondary analysts to contest the proposed research methods or conclusions that are drawn. Data publication, citation, and altmetrics have been proposed as alternative routes to credit data generators, which could address these disadvantages. Their primary downsides are that they are not well-established, it is difficult to acquire evidence to support their implementation, and that they could be gamed or give rise to novel forms of research misconduct. Conclusions: Alternative recognition mechanisms need to be more commonly used to generate evidence on their power to stimulate data sharing, and to assess where they fall short. There is ample discussion in policy documents on alternative crediting systems to work toward Open Science, which indicates that that there is an interest in working out more elaborate metascience programs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Metamedica, Faculty of Law and Criminology, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
Data-level metrics could encourage scientists to openly share data - a goal of Open Science - if these DLMs became part of the academic reward system.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- Metamedica, Faculty of Law and Criminology, University of Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Sanchini V, Devriendt T, Borry P. Anti-doping research and the Helsinki Declaration: (mis)match? Account Res 2020; 27:179-194. [PMID: 32088983 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2020.1733426] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/24/2022]
Abstract
The fight against doping in sport is internationally coordinated by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA). Through its World Anti-Doping Code, WADA aims to harmonize anti-doping policies, rules and regulations. One key reference document bound to the Code is the International Standard for Laboratories (ISL), which mainly specifies the criteria that must be met for laboratory accreditation, as well as standards to adopt for the production of valid test results and evidentiary data. Within the ISL, the Code of Ethics refers to the Helsinki Declaration as a guiding framework for anti-doping research. However, inasmuch as anti-doping research structurally differs from human subject research as considered by the Helsinki Declaration, the applicability of the latter to anti-doping research can be called into question. In this work, we discuss how key principles of the Helsinki Declaration apply to anti-doping research and highlight frictions, incompatibilities and misalignments. Furthermore, we indicate possible solutions for operationalizing the Helsinki principles within the context of anti-doping research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Virginia Sanchini
- Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.,Applied Research Division for Cognitive and Psychological Science, European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, Milan, Italy.,Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Thijs Devriendt
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
Background. The World Anti-Doping Agency is the international body coordinating anti-doping efforts, with the mandate of harmonizing anti-doping policy worldwide. With novel performance-enhancing compounds continuously entering the market, research is necessary to develop appropriate methods for their detection. WADA-accredited laboratories are required to spend 7% of their annual budget on this research and need to obtain ethics approval for studies involving human participants. Nevertheless, these labs may face difficulties in obtaining ethics approval for anti-doping research due to its distinct differences from traditional biomedical research. Therefore, our aim was to investigate potential difficulties in obtaining ethics approval for anti-doping research.Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with stakeholders in anti-doping research to investigate their experiences toward the ethics review process of their research proposals. Interviews were transcribed, de-identified, coded and analyzed.Results. The interviews indicated that large discrepancies in the evaluation of anti-doping research proposals exist. A majority of the laboratories could not acquire ethics approval for the administration of substances not approved for medical use. Some laboratories faced obstacles to obtain ethics approval for substances approved for clinical use. Respondents communicated that ethics committees often lack background knowledge about the anti-doping context.Conclusions. Disapproval of research proposals may originate from concerns over the safety of the study, the fact that there is seldom a direct benefit to the participant, the consideration that volunteers may be incentivized to use prohibited substances, a lack of background knowledge about anti-doping, or the focus of research ethics committees on health research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Virginia Sanchini
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Faculty of Philosophy, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy.,Department of Oncology and Hematology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Pascal Borry
- Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Devriendt T, Phillips A, Shabani M, Borry P. The Use of Samples Originating From Doping Control Procedures for Research Purposes: A Qualitative Study. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 2019; 14:254-261. [PMID: 31113287 DOI: 10.1177/1556264619842782] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Doping control samples may be used for research purposes by the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)-accredited laboratories after their compulsory storage period has expired. This study investigates opinions of stakeholders toward the governance of antidoping research on these samples and to evaluate the current framework. Semistructured interviews were conducted with stakeholders in antidoping research. The distinction between research and quality assurance in the International Standard for Laboratories (ISL) is neither well-understood nor interpreted uniformly by WADA-accredited labs. Most laboratories would not seek ethics approval for research on doping control samples. Interviewees considered that athletes should be better informed on what antidoping research can entail. A consistent and uniform approach toward the consent should be employed worldwide. Standards and safeguards should be implemented to reduce the risk of reidentification. Centralization of the Informed Consent Form in the ADAMS (Anti-Doping Administration & Management System) database would facilitate providing more information and allow the implementation of the right to withdraw.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- 1 KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Belgium
| | - Amicia Phillips
- 1 KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Belgium
| | - Mahsa Shabani
- 1 KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- 1 KU Leuven, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Abstract
The Athlete Biological Passport (ABP) refers to the collection of data related to an individual athlete. The ABP contains the Haematological Module and the Steroidal Module, which are used for the longitudinal monitoring of variables in blood and urine, respectively. Based on changes in these variables, a statistical model detects outliers which indicate doping use and guide further targeted testing of the athlete. Presently, athletes can access their data of the Haematological Module in the Anti-Doping Administration and Management System (ADAMS). However, granting athletes access to this data has been a matter of debate within the anti-doping community. This article investigates whether an athlete has a right to access the contents of their ABP profile. We approached this discussion by comparing the nature of ABP data with that of forensic and medical data and touched on important concerns with ABP data disclosure to athletes such as potentially allowing for the development of alternative doping techniques to circumvent detection; and making athletes vulnerable to pressure by the media to publicly release their data. Furthermore, given that ABP data may contain medically relevant information that can be used to diagnose disease, athletes may over-interpret its medical significance and wrongly see it as a free health check. We argue that safeguarding the integrity of the ABP system must be seen as the most essential element and thus a departure from immediate data disclosure is necessary. Two different strategies for delayed data disclosure are proposed which diminish the chances of ABP data being misused to refine doping techniques.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs Devriendt
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, University of Leuven, Belgium
| | - Davit Chokoshvili
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, University of Leuven, Belgium
| | - Maddalena Favaretto
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, University of Leuven, Belgium
| | - Pascal Borry
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, University of Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|