Advertisement

Academic Valorization of Biobanks

  • Anne-Marie Duguet
  • Laurence Mabile
  • Anne Cambon-Thomsen
Chapter

Abstract

Collections intended for purely academic purposes are run on a nonprofit basis, whereas commercially managed collections are intended to make a profit for their owners by placing on the market samples private researchers can buy when they do not have their own source of research materials. In recent years, researchers using collections for multicentric projects have been reflecting on how collections can best be used. Calls for applications for European research programs stipulate that consortia conduct their research in accordance with European and international ethical guidelines.

References

  1. Brand, A. M., & Proobst-Hensch, N. M. (2007). Biobanking for epidemiological research and public health. Pathology, 74, 227–238.Google Scholar
  2. Bravo, E., Calzolari, A., De Castro, P., Mabile, L., Napolitani, F., Rossi, A. M., et al. (2015). Developing a guideline to standardize the citation of bioresources in journal articles (CoBRA). BMC Medicine, 13(33), 1–12.Google Scholar
  3. Cambon-Thomsen, A. (2003). Assessing the impact of biobanks. Nature Genetics, 34, 25–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cambon-Thomsen, A., Mabile, L., & Rial-sebbag, E. (2012). Aspects éthiques et valorisation scientifique des cohortes adsp n°78 March 2012.Google Scholar
  5. Duguet, A. M., Martrille, L., & Boucly, G. (2005). Le corps morcelé et les restes humains. In Le respect du corps humain pendant la vie et après la mort (pp. 213–223). Les Etudes Hospitalières. www.leh.fr.
  6. Garfield, E. (2006). The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA, 295(1), 90–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mabile, L., Dalgleish, R., Thorisson, G. A., Deschênes, M., Hewitt, R., Carpenter, J., et al. (2013). Quantifying the use of bioresources for promoting their sharing in scientific research. Gigascience, 2(1), 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mabile, L., De Castro, P., Bravo, E., Parodi, B., Thomsen, M., Moore, S., et al. (2016). Towards new tools for bioresource use and sharing. Information Services and Use.  https://doi.org/10.3233/isu-160811.
  9. Napolitani, F., Calzolari, A., Cambon-Thomsen, A., Mabile, L., Rossi, A. M., De Castro, P., et al. (2016). Biobankers: Treat the poison of invisibility with CoBRA, a systematic way of citing bioresources in journal articles. Biopreservation and Biobanking. (Brief report).Google Scholar
  10. Pukkala, E. (2011). Biobanks and registers in epidemiologic research on cancer. Methods in Molecular Biology, 675, 127–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. van Veen, E. B., Riegman, P. H., Dinjens, W. N., Lam, K. H., Oomen, M. H., Spatz, A., et al. (2006). Tubafrost3: Regulatory and ethical issues on the exchange of residual tissue for research across Europe. European Journal of Cancer, 42, 2914–2923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne-Marie Duguet
    • 1
  • Laurence Mabile
    • 2
  • Anne Cambon-Thomsen
    • 1
  1. 1.UMR 1027 Inserm, University of Toulouse III Paul SabatierToulouseFrance
  2. 2.BRIF (Bioresource Research Impact Factor)UMR 1027 Inserm, University of Toulouse III Paul SabatierToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations