IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0138239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To Share or Not to Share? A Survey of Biomedical Researchers in the U.S. Southwest, an Ethnically Diverse Region

Author

Listed:
  • Mai H Oushy
  • Rebecca Palacios
  • Alan E C Holden
  • Amelie G Ramirez
  • Kipling J Gallion
  • Mary A O’Connell

Abstract

Background: Cancer health disparities research depends on access to biospecimens from diverse racial/ethnic populations. This multimethodological study, using mixed methods for quantitative and qualitative analysis of survey results, assessed barriers, concerns, and practices for sharing biospecimens/data among researchers working with biospecimens from minority populations in a 5 state region of the United States (Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas). The ultimate goals of this research were to understand data sharing barriers among biomedical researchers; guide strategies to increase participation in biospecimen research; and strengthen collaborative opportunities among researchers. Methods and Population: Email invitations to anonymous participants (n = 605 individuals identified by the NIH RePORT database), resulted in 112 responses. The survey assessed demographics, specimen collection data, and attitudes about virtual biorepositories. Respondents were primarily principal investigators at PhD granting institutions (91.1%) conducting basic (62.3%) research; most were non-Hispanic White (63.4%) and men (60.6%). The low response rate limited the statistical power of the analyses, further the number of respondents for each survey question was variable. Results: Findings from this study identified barriers to biospecimen research, including lack of access to sufficient biospecimens, and limited availability of diverse tissue samples. Many of these barriers can be attributed to poor annotation of biospecimens, and researchers’ unwillingness to share existing collections. Addressing these barriers to accessing biospecimens is essential to combating cancer in general and cancer health disparities in particular. This study confirmed researchers’ willingness to participate in a virtual biorepository (n = 50 respondents agreed). However, researchers in this region listed clear specifications for establishing and using such a biorepository: specifications related to standardized procedures, funding, and protections of human subjects and intellectual property. The results help guide strategies to increase data sharing behaviors and to increase participation of researchers with multiethnic biospecimen collections in collaborative research endeavors Conclusions: Data sharing by researchers is essential to leveraging knowledge and resources needed for the advancement of research on cancer health disparities. Although U.S. funding entities have guidelines for data and resource sharing, future efforts should address researcher preferences in order to promote collaboration to address cancer health disparities.

Suggested Citation

  • Mai H Oushy & Rebecca Palacios & Alan E C Holden & Amelie G Ramirez & Kipling J Gallion & Mary A O’Connell, 2015. "To Share or Not to Share? A Survey of Biomedical Researchers in the U.S. Southwest, an Ethnically Diverse Region," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-25, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0138239
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138239
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0138239
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0138239&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0138239?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lee Cronbach, 1951. "Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 16(3), pages 297-334, September.
    2. Henry Kaiser, 1970. "A second generation little jiffy," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 35(4), pages 401-415, December.
    3. Henry Kaiser, 1974. "An index of factorial simplicity," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 39(1), pages 31-36, March.
    4. Pacheco, C.M. & Daley, S.M. & Brown, T. & Filippi, M. & Greiner, K.A. & Daley, C.M., 2013. "Moving forward: Breaking the cycle of mistrust between American Indians and researchers," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 103(12), pages 2152-2159.
    5. Piwowar, Heather A. & Chapman, Wendy W., 2010. "Public sharing of research datasets: A pilot study of associations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 148-156.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Reshmi Banerjee & Avani Desai, 2021. "A Study of Competencies and Challenges of Indian Women Entrepreneurs," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 105-130.
    2. Khasawneh, Odai Y., 2018. "Technophobia: Examining its hidden factors and defining it," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 93-100.
    3. Jayaram, Jayanth & Tan, Keah-Choon, 2010. "Supply chain integration with third-party logistics providers," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 262-271, June.
    4. Belén Casales Morici, 2022. "Strategic corporate entrepreneurship practices in financial services firms: the role of organizational factors," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(9), pages 1-26, September.
    5. Eunice Kabahinda & Rogers Mwesigwa, 2023. "Trust Mediates the Relationship Between Stakeholder Behavior and Stakeholder Management of Public Private Partnership Projects in Uganda," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 245-263, March.
    6. Dyego Carlos Souza Anacleto de Araújo & Sylmara Nayara Pereira & Willian Melo dos Santos & Pedro Wlisses dos Santos Menezes & Kérilin Stancine dos Santos Rocha & Sabrina Cerqueira-Santos & André Faro , 2021. "Brazilian version of the Personal Report of Communication Apprehension: Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation among healthcare students," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    7. Jaime Martín-Martín & Bella Pajares-Hachero & Emilio Alba-Conejo & Nuria Ribelles & Antonio I. Cuesta-Vargas & Cristina Roldán-Jiménez, 2023. "Validation of the Upper Limb Functional Index on Breast Cancer Survivor," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-10, March.
    8. Kanishka Gupta & Abdul Wajid & Dolly Gaur, 2024. "Determinants of continuous intention to use FinTech services: the moderating role of COVID-19," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(2), pages 536-552, June.
    9. Nuno Garoupa & Rok Spruk, 2024. "Measuring Political Institutions in the Long Run: A Latent Variable Analysis of Political Regimes, 1810–2018," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 173(3), pages 867-914, July.
    10. Hauck, Jana & Suess-Reyes, Julia & Beck, Susanne & Prügl, Reinhard & Frank, Hermann, 2016. "Measuring socioemotional wealth in family-owned and -managed firms: A validation and short form of the FIBER Scale," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 133-148.
    11. Hasnan Baber, 2020. "FinTech, Crowdfunding and Customer Retention in Islamic Banks," Vision, , vol. 24(3), pages 260-268, September.
    12. Francisco B. Galarza & Joanna Kámiche Zegarra & Rosario Gómez, 2023. "Roads and Deforestation: Do Local Institutions Matter?," Working Papers 192, Peruvian Economic Association.
    13. Fen Ren & Kexin Wang, 2022. "Modeling of the Chinese Dating App Use Motivation Scale According to Item Response Theory and Classical Test Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-15, October.
    14. Jinan Hatem Issa & Hazri Jamil, 2012. "Criteria Affecting Pre-service TESOL Teachers’ Attitudes towards Using CD-ROM Dictionaries," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 5(5), pages 118-118, May.
    15. Robert Semel, 2016. "The Caring-Uncaring Emotional (CUE) Inventory: A Pilot Study of a New Measure of Affective Psychopathy Traits," International Journal of Psychological Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(4), pages 1-1, December.
    16. Chao-Ming Wang & Bo-Ting Lee & Ting-Yun Lo, 2023. "The Design of a Novel Digital Puzzle Gaming System for Young Children’s Learning by Interactive Multi-Sensing and Tangible User Interfacing Techniques," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-43, February.
    17. Ernest Bielinis & Jianzhong Xu & Aneta Anna Omelan, 2020. "A Novel Anti-Environmental Forest Experience Scale to Predict Preferred Pleasantness Associated with Forest Environments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-18, September.
    18. Nguyen Ba Chien & Nguyen Nghi Thanh, 2022. "The Impact of Good Governance on the People’s Satisfaction with Public Administrative Services in Vietnam," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, February.
    19. Raveenajit Kaur A. P. & Kalvant Singh & Alberto Luis August, 2021. "Exploring the Factor Structure of the Constructs of Technological, Pedagogical, and Content Knowledge (TPACK): An Exploratory Factor Analysis Based on the Perceptions of TESOL Pre-Service Teachers at ," Research Journal of Education, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 7(2), pages 103-115, 06-2021.
    20. Martha Ríos Manríquez & Celina López Mateo & Julián Ferrer Guerra, 2016. "Factorial Validation of a Corporate Social Responsibility Perception Scale for Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises," Information Management and Business Review, AMH International, vol. 8(5), pages 25-38.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0138239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.