Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.
Views of university students in Jordan towards Biobanking
24
Zitationen
6
Autoren
2021
Jahr
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Biobanks are considered primary means+ of supporting contemporary research, in order to deliver personalized and precise diagnostics with public acceptance and participation as a cornerstone for their success. AIMS: This study aims to assess knowledge, perception, and attitudes towards biomedical research and biobanking among students at the University of Jordan. METHODOLOGY: An online questionnaire was designed, developed, and piloted. It was divided into 5 sections that included questions related to issues of biomedical research and biobanking as well as factors influencing the decision to participate. RESULTS: Responses from 435 students revealed that 52.9% previously heard of biobanks. There was an overwhelming acceptance for participation in biomedical, genetic, and biobanking research. A blood sample was the most preferred for donation. Protection of privacy, informed consent prior to donation, approval of an ethics committee, and trust towards researchers were the most important factors associated with willingness to participate. On the other hand, the vagueness of the type of research performed on the biospecimens and the unavailability of general research results to the donor had a negative connotation. There was no clear agreement on the type of informed consent preferred by students, but to be contacted and informed of research results was preferred by the majority. Students also preferred the disposal of biospecimens and information when deciding to withdraw from participation. CONCLUSION: There is strong enthusiasm among students to participate in biomedical research and biobanking with all rights reserved thus providing hope for a very promising future in Jordan.
Ähnliche Arbeiten
World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects
2003 · 10.822 Zit.
SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials
2013 · 7.015 Zit.
Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials
1995 · 5.586 Zit.
The ARRIVE guidelines 2.0: Updated guidelines for reporting animal research
2020 · 5.445 Zit.
The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines
2019 · 4.829 Zit.