Measuring the Contribution of Tumor Biobanks to Research in Oncology: Surrogate Indicators and Bibliographic Output
- 1 August 2013
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Mary Ann Liebert Inc in Biopreservation and Biobanking
- Vol. 11 (4), 235-244
- https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2013.0015
Abstract
The number of biobanks, in particular hospital-integrated tumor biobanks (HITB), is increasing all around the world. This is the consequence of an increase in the need for human biological resources for scientific projects and more specifically, for translational and clinical research. The robustness and reproducibility of the results obtained depend greatly on the quality of the biospecimens and the associated clinical data. They also depend on the number of patients studied and on the expertise of the biobank that supplied the biospecimens. The quality of a research biobank is undoubtedly reflected in the number and overall quality of the research projects conducted with biospecimens provided by the biobank. Since the quality of a research project can be measured from the impact factor of resulting publications, this also provides some indication of the quality of a research biobank. It is necessary for the biobank community to define “surrogate” quality indicators, and to establish systems of evaluation in relation to current and future resource requirements. These indicators will help in the realistic assessment of biobanks by institutions and funding bodies, and they will help biobanks demonstrate their value, raise their quality standards, and compete for funding. Given that biobanks are expensive structures to maintain, funding issues are particularly important, especially in the current economic climate. Use of performance indicators may also contribute to the development of a biobank impact factor or “bioresource research impact factor” (BRIF). Here we review four major categories of indicators that appear to be useful for the evaluation of a(m) HITB (quality, activity, scientific productivity, and “visibility”). In addition, we propose a scoring system to measure the chosen indicators.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- Identification of Evidence-Based Biospecimen Quality-Control ToolsThe Journal of Molecular Diagnostics, 2012
- Impact of warm ischemia on gene expression analysis in surgically removed biosamplesAnalytical Biochemistry, 2012
- Biobanking residual tissuesHuman Genetics, 2011
- Biobanking in a Fast Moving World: An International PerspectiveJNCI Monographs, 2011
- Biospecimen Reporting for Improved Study QualityBiopreservation and Biobanking, 2011
- Biobanking: the foundation of personalized medicineCurrent Opinion in Oncology, 2011
- The role of the pathologist in tissue banking: European Consensus Expert Group ReportVirchows Archiv, 2010
- Banking human tissue for research: vision to realityCell and Tissue Banking, 2008
- Should donors be allowed to give broad consent to future biobank research?The Lancet Oncology, 2006
- Assessing the impact of biobanksNature Genetics, 2003