Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 May 20.
Published in final edited form as: Genet Med. 2011 Sep;13(9):821–831. doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31821d2f88

Table 3.

Summary of survey and focus group results on scope of permission for future use options for biobanking

Method Survey (n = 751), % preferred (95% CI) Focus groups (n = 48), % preferred Common likes Common concerns
Broad 41 (37–45%) 54 Allows for flexibility in research; logical given uncertainty of future research; logistically easier; spurs research and research output Minimally informative; disallows individual control over sample and information use
Categorical 25 (21–28%) 21 Provides some level of information and choice over future sample and information use; can participate in research that has personal meaning Categorical choices may be confusing or misunderstood; could hinder research; logistically complicated; people may not feel qualified to make selections
Study specific 29 (25–32%) 21 Promotes knowledge, choice and control over research participation; may facilitate return of research results Recontact fatigue; may hinder research if subjects cannot be reached or if not enough people consent to a particular study; resource intensive and impractical
No preference 4 (3–6%) 4