IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0229044.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolving public views on the value of one’s DNA and expectations for genomic database governance: Results from a national survey

Author

Listed:
  • Forrest Briscoe
  • Ifeoma Ajunwa
  • Allison Gaddis
  • Jennifer McCormick

Abstract

We report results from a large survey of public attitudes regarding genomic database governance. Prior surveys focused on the context of academic-sponsored biobanks, framing data provision as altruistic donation; our survey is designed to reflect four growing trends: genomic databases are found across many sectors; they are used for more than academic biomedical research; their value is reflected in corporate transactions; and additional related privacy risks are coming to light. To examine how attitudes may evolve in response to these trends, we provided survey respondents with information from mainstream media coverage of them. We then found only 11.7% of respondents willing to altruistically donate their data, versus 50.6% willing to provide data if financially compensated, and 37.8% unwilling to provide data regardless of compensation. Because providing one’s genomic data is sometimes bundled with receipt of a personalized genomic report, we also asked respondents what price they would be willing to pay for a personalized report. Subtracting that response value from one’s expected compensation for providing data (if any) yields a net expected payment. For the altruistic donors, median net expected payment was -$75 (i.e. they expected to pay $75 for the bundle). For respondents wanting compensation for their data, however, median net expected payment was +$95 (i.e. they expected to receive $95). When asked about different genomic database governance policies, most respondents preferred options that allowed them more control over their data. In particular, they favored policies restricting data sharing or reuse unless permission is specifically granted by the individual. Policy preferences were also relatively consistent regardless of the sector in which the genomic database was located. Together these findings offer a forward-looking window on individual preferences that can be useful for institutions of all types as they develop governance approaches in this area of large-scale data sharing.

Suggested Citation

  • Forrest Briscoe & Ifeoma Ajunwa & Allison Gaddis & Jennifer McCormick, 2020. "Evolving public views on the value of one’s DNA and expectations for genomic database governance: Results from a national survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-10, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0229044
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229044
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0229044&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0229044?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. Samuel J. Aronson & Heidi L. Rehm, 2015. "Building the foundation for genomics in precision medicine," Nature, Nature, vol. 526(7573), pages 336-342, October.
    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. Rohini Chakravarthy & Sarah C Stallings & Michael Williams & Megan Hollister & Mario Davidson & Juan Canedo & Consuelo H Wilkins, 2020. "Factors influencing precision medicine knowledge and attitudes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Amalia R. Miller & Catherine Tucker, 2018. "Privacy Protection, Personalized Medicine, and Genetic Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4648-4668, October.
    3. Huchang Liao & Ming Tang & Li Luo & Chunyang Li & Francisco Chiclana & Xiao-Jun Zeng, 2018. "A Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization of Medical Big Data Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-18, January.

    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:pone00:0229044. 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.