Stakeholder engagement to ensure the sustainability of biobanks: a survey of potential users of biobank services
Open Access
- 24 May 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in European Journal of Human Genetics
- Vol. 30 (12), 1344-1354
- https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-021-00905-x
Abstract
Biobanks are important infrastructures facilitating biomedical research. After a decade of rolling out such infrastructures, a shift in attention to the sustainability of biobanks could be observed in recent years. In this regard, an increase in the as yet relatively low utilisation rates of biobanks has been formulated as a goal. Higher utilisation rates can only be achieved if the perspectives of potential users of biobanks—particularly researchers not yet collaborating with biobanks—are adequately considered. To better understand their perspectives, a survey was conducted at ten different research institutions in Germany hosting a centralised biobank. The survey targeted potential users of biobank services, i.e. researchers working with biosamples. It addressed the general demand for biosamples, strategies for biosample acquisition/storage and reasons for/against collaborating with biobanks. In total, 354 researchers filled out the survey. Most interestingly, only a minority of researchers (12%) acquired their biosamples via biobanks. Of the respondents not collaborating with biobanks on sample acquisition, around half were not aware of the (services of the) respective local biobank. Those who actively decided against acquiring biosamples via a biobank provided different reasons. Most commonly, respondents stated that the biosamples required were not available, the costs were too high and information about the available biosamples was not readily accessible. Biobanks can draw many lessons from the results of the survey. Particularly, external communication and outreach should be improved. Additionally, biobanks might have to reassess whether their particular collection strategies are adequately aligned with local researchers’ needs.Keywords
Funding Information
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01EY1709, 01EY1711A, 01EY1711B, 01EY1708, 01EY1712, 01EY1707, 01EY1706, 01EY1710, 01EY1704, 01EY1705, 01EY1701, 01EY1709, 01EY1711B, 01EY1702, 01EY1708, 01EY1712, 01EY1701, 01EY1701, 01EY1712, 01EY1707, 01EY1706, 01EY1710, 01EY1704, 01EY1704, 01EY1705, 01EY1701)
This publication has 36 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Framework for Biobank SustainabilityBiopreservation and Biobanking, 2014
- Neglected ethical issues in biobank management: Results from a U.S. studyLife Sciences, Society and Policy, 2013
- Biobank managers bemoan underuse of collected samplesNature Medicine, 2013
- Characterizing biobank organizations in the U.S.: results from a national surveyGenome Medicine, 2013
- Consent and Research Governance in Biobanks: Evidence from Focus Groups with Medical ResearchersPublic Health Genomics, 2012
- Stakeholder Analysis: A Useful Tool for Biobank PlanningBiopreservation and Biobanking, 2012
- Researchers’ opinions towards the communication of results of biobank research: a survey studyEuropean Journal of Human Genetics, 2011
- Comprehensive catalog of European biobanksNature Biotechnology, 2011
- Reporting Guidelines for Survey Research: An Analysis of Published Guidance and Reporting PracticesPLoS Medicine, 2011
- Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2004