Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Sep 20, 2019
Date Accepted: Jan 30, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Toward a Risk-Utility Data Governance Framework for Research Using Genomic and Phenotypic Data in Safe Havens: Multifaceted Review

Jones K, Daniels H, Heys S, Lacey A, Ford DV

Toward a Risk-Utility Data Governance Framework for Research Using Genomic and Phenotypic Data in Safe Havens: Multifaceted Review

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(5):e16346

DOI: 10.2196/16346

PMID: 32412420

PMCID: 7260661

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Towards a risk-utility data governance framework for research using genomic and phenotypic data in safe havens

  • Kerina Jones; 
  • Helen Daniels; 
  • Sharon Heys; 
  • Arron Lacey; 
  • David V Ford

ABSTRACT

Background:

Research using genomic data opens up new insights into health and disease. Being able to use the data in association with health and administrative record data held in safe havens can multiply the benefits. However, there is much discussion about the use of genomic data with perceptions of particular challenges in doing so safely and effectively.

Objective:

To work towards a risk-utility data governance framework for research using genomic and phenotypic data in anonymised form for research in safe havens.

Methods:

We used a multi-faceted approach drawing upon: data governance arrangements in published research; case studies of organisations working with genomic and phenotypic data; public views and expectations; and example studies using genomic and phenotypic data in combination. The findings were contextualised against a backdrop of legislative and regulatory requirements and used to create recommendations.

Results:

We propose recommendations towards a risk-utility model with a flexible suite of controls to safeguard privacy and retain data utility for research. These are presented as overarching principles aligned to the core elements in the data sharing framework produced by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health, and practical control measures distilled from published literature and case studies of operational safe havens to be applied as required at a project-specific level.

Conclusions:

The recommendations presented can be used to contribute towards a proportionate data governance framework to promote the safe, socially-acceptable use of genomic and phenotypic data in safe havens. They do not purport to eradicate risk, but propose case-by-case assessment with transparency and accountability. If the risks are adequately understood and mitigated there should be no reason that linked genomic and phenotypic data should not be used in anonymised form for research in safe havens. Clinical Trial: N/A


 Citation

Please cite as:

Jones K, Daniels H, Heys S, Lacey A, Ford DV

Toward a Risk-Utility Data Governance Framework for Research Using Genomic and Phenotypic Data in Safe Havens: Multifaceted Review

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(5):e16346

DOI: 10.2196/16346

PMID: 32412420

PMCID: 7260661

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.