Publication:
Challenges arising when seeking broad consent for health research data sharing: A qualitative study of perspectives in Thailand

dc.contributor.authorPhaik Yeong Cheahen_US
dc.contributor.authorNattapat Jatupornpimolen_US
dc.contributor.authorBorimas Hanboonkunupakarnen_US
dc.contributor.authorNapat Khirikoekkongen_US
dc.contributor.authorPodjanee Jittamalaen_US
dc.contributor.authorSasithon Pukrittayakameeen_US
dc.contributor.authorNicholas P.J. Dayen_US
dc.contributor.authorMichael Parkeren_US
dc.contributor.authorSusan Bullen_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Oxforden_US
dc.contributor.otherMahidol Universityen_US
dc.contributor.otherNuffield Department of Clinical Medicineen_US
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-23T11:36:31Z
dc.date.available2019-08-23T11:36:31Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-07en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2018 The Author(s). Background: Research funders, regulatory agencies, and journals are increasingly expecting that individual-level data from health research will be shared. Broad consent to such sharing is considered appropriate, feasible and acceptable in low- and middle-income settings, but to date limited empirical research has been conducted to inform the design of such processes. We examined stakeholder perspectives about how best to seek broad consent to sharing data from the Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit, which implemented a data sharing policy and broad consent to data sharing in January 2016. Methods: Between February and August 2017 qualitative data were collected at two sites, Bangkok and the Thai-Myanmar border town of Mae Sot. We conducted eighteen semi-structured interviews. We also conducted four focus group discussions with a total of nineteen people. Descriptive and thematic coding informed analysis of aspects of data sharing that are considered most important to inform participants about, and the best ways to explain complex and abstract topics relating to data sharing. Results: The findings demonstrated that clinical trial participants prioritise information about the potential benefits and harms of data sharing. Stakeholders made multiple suggestions for clarifying information provided about data sharing on such topics. There was significant variation amongst stakeholders' perspectives about how much information should be provided about data sharing, and it was clear that effective information provision should be responsive to the study, the study population, the individual research participant and the research context. Conclusions: Effectively communicating about data sharing with research participants is challenging in practice, highlighting the importance of robust and effective data sharing governance in this context. Broad consent should incorporate effective and efficient explanations of data sharing to promote informed decision-making, without impeding research participants' understandings of key aspects of the research from which data will be shared. Further work is required to refine both the development of core information about data sharing to be provided to all research participants, and appropriate solutions for context specific-challenges arising when explaining data sharing.en_US
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Ethics. Vol.19, No.1 (2018)en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12910-018-0326-xen_US
dc.identifier.issn14726939en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85056400204en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/46191
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85056400204&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.subjectSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.titleChallenges arising when seeking broad consent for health research data sharing: A qualitative study of perspectives in Thailanden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85056400204&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections