Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation
In April 2007, a research team led by M. Burgess conducted a public engagement, the BC Biobank Deliberation, focused on the issue of biobanks. The project was motivated by an observation that current policy approaches to social and ethical issues surrounding biobanks manifest certain democratic defi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Community genetics 2009-01, Vol.12 (4), p.203-215 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 215 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 203 |
container_title | Community genetics |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | O’Doherty, K.C. Burgess, M.M. |
description | In April 2007, a research team led by M. Burgess conducted a public engagement, the BC Biobank Deliberation, focused on the issue of biobanks. The project was motivated by an observation that current policy approaches to social and ethical issues surrounding biobanks manifest certain democratic deficits. The public engagement was informed by political theory on deliberative democracy with the aim of informing biobanking policies, in particular in British Columbia (BC), Canada. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive outline of the conclusions reached by the deliberants (both recommendations based on consensus and issues that emerged as persistent disagreements). However, the process whereby the specific conclusions to be delivered to policy makers are identified is not a self-evident process. We thus provide a critical analysis of how the results of a public engagement such as the BC Biobank Deliberation can be conceptualized given the context of a large qualitative data set and an imperative to provide useful information to policy makers, while honoring the mandate under which deliberants were recruited. In particular, we make the case for distinguishing between deliberative outputs of public engagement and analytical outputs that are the product of social scientific analyses of such engagements. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1159/000167801 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1159_000167801</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>26777415</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>26777415</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-d6d5392fba854e143a68f54c853ad7fb4f33c784517f931c0fa9273fe50f8abc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0DtPwzAQB3ALgWgpDOw8IgYkhoCfZ3uEqjykSjDAHDmJHdJHUuxk4NsTlEAlFqY76X530v0ROib4mhChbzDGBKTCZAeNCQCNFQa2O_ScchihgxAWGAMHDPtoRDQDiZUeo_NZVZiirIqoebfRS5uuyiyqq-iurFNTLcMh2nNmFezRUCfo7X72On2M588PT9PbeZwxxZs4h1wwTV1qlOCWcGZAOcEzJZjJpUu5YyyTigsinWYkw85oKpmzAjtl0oxN0GV_d-Prj9aGJlmXIbOrlals3YYEJGESBPkXUqypEJJ28OIPXNStr7onEsCScgZMd-iqR5mvQ_DWJRtfro3_TAhOvrNNfrPt7NlwsE3XNt_KIcwOnPRgaXxh_Rb87J_240Vo6u2UgpSSE8G-AJR-gss</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>607243639</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Karger Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>O’Doherty, K.C. ; Burgess, M.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>O’Doherty, K.C. ; Burgess, M.M.</creatorcontrib><description>In April 2007, a research team led by M. Burgess conducted a public engagement, the BC Biobank Deliberation, focused on the issue of biobanks. The project was motivated by an observation that current policy approaches to social and ethical issues surrounding biobanks manifest certain democratic deficits. The public engagement was informed by political theory on deliberative democracy with the aim of informing biobanking policies, in particular in British Columbia (BC), Canada. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive outline of the conclusions reached by the deliberants (both recommendations based on consensus and issues that emerged as persistent disagreements). However, the process whereby the specific conclusions to be delivered to policy makers are identified is not a self-evident process. We thus provide a critical analysis of how the results of a public engagement such as the BC Biobank Deliberation can be conceptualized given the context of a large qualitative data set and an imperative to provide useful information to policy makers, while honoring the mandate under which deliberants were recruited. In particular, we make the case for distinguishing between deliberative outputs of public engagement and analytical outputs that are the product of social scientific analyses of such engagements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1662-4246</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1662-8063</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1159/000167801</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19367089</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basel, Switzerland: S. Karger AG</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; British Columbia ; Community Participation ; Democracy ; Humans ; Middle Aged ; Original Paper ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Tissue Banks</subject><ispartof>Community genetics, 2009-01, Vol.12 (4), p.203-215</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><rights>2008 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><rights>Copyright 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel.</rights><rights>Copyright (c) 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-d6d5392fba854e143a68f54c853ad7fb4f33c784517f931c0fa9273fe50f8abc3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-d6d5392fba854e143a68f54c853ad7fb4f33c784517f931c0fa9273fe50f8abc3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26777415$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26777415$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,2423,27905,27906,57998,58231</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19367089$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>O’Doherty, K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, M.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation</title><title>Community genetics</title><addtitle>Public Health Genomics</addtitle><description>In April 2007, a research team led by M. Burgess conducted a public engagement, the BC Biobank Deliberation, focused on the issue of biobanks. The project was motivated by an observation that current policy approaches to social and ethical issues surrounding biobanks manifest certain democratic deficits. The public engagement was informed by political theory on deliberative democracy with the aim of informing biobanking policies, in particular in British Columbia (BC), Canada. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive outline of the conclusions reached by the deliberants (both recommendations based on consensus and issues that emerged as persistent disagreements). However, the process whereby the specific conclusions to be delivered to policy makers are identified is not a self-evident process. We thus provide a critical analysis of how the results of a public engagement such as the BC Biobank Deliberation can be conceptualized given the context of a large qualitative data set and an imperative to provide useful information to policy makers, while honoring the mandate under which deliberants were recruited. In particular, we make the case for distinguishing between deliberative outputs of public engagement and analytical outputs that are the product of social scientific analyses of such engagements.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>British Columbia</subject><subject>Community Participation</subject><subject>Democracy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Original Paper</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Tissue Banks</subject><issn>1662-4246</issn><issn>1662-8063</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0DtPwzAQB3ALgWgpDOw8IgYkhoCfZ3uEqjykSjDAHDmJHdJHUuxk4NsTlEAlFqY76X530v0ROib4mhChbzDGBKTCZAeNCQCNFQa2O_ScchihgxAWGAMHDPtoRDQDiZUeo_NZVZiirIqoebfRS5uuyiyqq-iurFNTLcMh2nNmFezRUCfo7X72On2M588PT9PbeZwxxZs4h1wwTV1qlOCWcGZAOcEzJZjJpUu5YyyTigsinWYkw85oKpmzAjtl0oxN0GV_d-Prj9aGJlmXIbOrlals3YYEJGESBPkXUqypEJJ28OIPXNStr7onEsCScgZMd-iqR5mvQ_DWJRtfro3_TAhOvrNNfrPt7NlwsE3XNt_KIcwOnPRgaXxh_Rb87J_240Vo6u2UgpSSE8G-AJR-gss</recordid><startdate>20090101</startdate><enddate>20090101</enddate><creator>O’Doherty, K.C.</creator><creator>Burgess, M.M.</creator><general>S. Karger AG</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090101</creationdate><title>Engaging the Public on Biobanks</title><author>O’Doherty, K.C. ; Burgess, M.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c384t-d6d5392fba854e143a68f54c853ad7fb4f33c784517f931c0fa9273fe50f8abc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>British Columbia</topic><topic>Community Participation</topic><topic>Democracy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Original Paper</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Tissue Banks</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>O’Doherty, K.C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, M.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Community genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>O’Doherty, K.C.</au><au>Burgess, M.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation</atitle><jtitle>Community genetics</jtitle><addtitle>Public Health Genomics</addtitle><date>2009-01-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>215</epage><pages>203-215</pages><issn>1662-4246</issn><eissn>1662-8063</eissn><abstract>In April 2007, a research team led by M. Burgess conducted a public engagement, the BC Biobank Deliberation, focused on the issue of biobanks. The project was motivated by an observation that current policy approaches to social and ethical issues surrounding biobanks manifest certain democratic deficits. The public engagement was informed by political theory on deliberative democracy with the aim of informing biobanking policies, in particular in British Columbia (BC), Canada. The purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive outline of the conclusions reached by the deliberants (both recommendations based on consensus and issues that emerged as persistent disagreements). However, the process whereby the specific conclusions to be delivered to policy makers are identified is not a self-evident process. We thus provide a critical analysis of how the results of a public engagement such as the BC Biobank Deliberation can be conceptualized given the context of a large qualitative data set and an imperative to provide useful information to policy makers, while honoring the mandate under which deliberants were recruited. In particular, we make the case for distinguishing between deliberative outputs of public engagement and analytical outputs that are the product of social scientific analyses of such engagements.</abstract><cop>Basel, Switzerland</cop><pub>S. Karger AG</pub><pmid>19367089</pmid><doi>10.1159/000167801</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1662-4246 |
ispartof | Community genetics, 2009-01, Vol.12 (4), p.203-215 |
issn | 1662-4246 1662-8063 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1159_000167801 |
source | MEDLINE; Jstor Complete Legacy; Karger Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adult Aged British Columbia Community Participation Democracy Humans Middle Aged Original Paper Outcome Assessment (Health Care) Tissue Banks |
title | Engaging the Public on Biobanks: Outcomes of the BC Biobank Deliberation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T17%3A49%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Engaging%20the%20Public%20on%20Biobanks:%20Outcomes%20of%20the%20BC%20Biobank%20Deliberation&rft.jtitle=Community%20genetics&rft.au=O%E2%80%99Doherty,%20K.C.&rft.date=2009-01-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=215&rft.pages=203-215&rft.issn=1662-4246&rft.eissn=1662-8063&rft_id=info:doi/10.1159/000167801&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_cross%3E26777415%3C/jstor_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=607243639&rft_id=info:pmid/19367089&rft_jstor_id=26777415&rfr_iscdi=true |