| 1. Scientific quality |
33 |
26 |
15 |
52 |
22 |
Quality safeguard |
Peer review |
13 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quality management |
2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reliability of preanalytical measurements methods |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Methodological quality |
Sound methodology |
17 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sound sample size |
13 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Feasibility |
10 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relation to existing research |
10 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sound research question |
5 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reproducibility |
2 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consistency |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Capacities and infrastructure |
Relevant expertise of researchers |
19 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sufficient resources and funding |
16 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sufficient infrastructure |
8 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Possibility for cooperation and networking |
7 |
| 2. Value |
12 |
19 |
43 |
25 |
49 |
Scientific value |
Scientific research purposes only |
24 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution to scientific knowledge |
12 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Novelty and innovation |
9 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proportionate sample size |
3 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Typology of resources |
3 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential to increase the quality of the samples or data sets |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected audience for results |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Health-related value |
Expected impact on clinical practice |
4 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected impact on public health |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilitarian value |
1 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individual benefit for participants/donors |
1 |
| 3. Ethical soundness |
14 |
42 |
18 |
54 |
20 |
Adherence to ethical principles |
Independent ethical approval |
43 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conformity with biobank statutes |
16 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conformity with current ethical standards, laws and regulations |
13 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Participant/donor protection |
Conformity with donor consent |
24 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk of identification of participants/donors |
7 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data protection |
8 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Re-) Contacting |
6 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Potential harm to donor compliance |
3 |
