Scandinavian journal of public health · 2024
Legal obstacles jeopardise research in personalised medicine - experiences from a Nordic collaboration within rheumatology.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Glintborg Bente, Hansson Mats, Hammer Hilde Berner, Klareskog Lars, Saevarsdottir Saedis, Westerlind Helga, Rönnelid Johan, Gehring Isabel, Benson Mikael, Esbensen Bente Appel, Hetland Merete Lund, Padyukov Leonid, Kragstrup Tue Wenzel, Hauge Ellen-Margrethe, AxnÄs Barbara Bislawska, Krogh Niels Steen, Johannesson Martina, Askling Johan
Аннотация
AIMS: Personalised medicine in chronic complex diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is within reach but requires international multi-stakeholder collaboration. We exemplify how national implementations of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) have introduced administrative delays and created disincentives for data sharing and collaborative research.
METHODS: Our Danish/Swedish/Norwegian research collaboration (the 3-year NordForsk-funded "NORA" project) aims to develop a personalised medicine approach for the management of RA, built on the exploitation of unique existing data sources: longitudinal data from clinical rheumatology registries, research cohorts, nationwide health care registries, and biobank material from >20 sample collections. Data and results are shared and accessed remotely by collaborators at secure servers. New biomarker assays and patient-centric implementations of the results are to be explored, validated, and disseminated to patients and health care via the development of digital tools.
RESULTS: Following the advice of legal experts at the involved academic or public institutions and private companies, GDPR compliance resulted in >20 legal documents to govern the collaboration (consortium-, joint controller-, research collaboration-, data sharing-, and a series of unique two-way data processing-, and material transfer agreements). Lack of agreed-upon templates, policies, procedures, and a shortage of legal resources have caused considerable delays. Thus, our research consortium has spent more time ensuring GDPR compliance than on actual research activities.
CONCLUSIONS: The current interpretation and implementation of the legal premises (rather than the GDPR per se) for research collaborations caused unnecessary barriers and delays. Our experiences call for Nordic trust-based code-of-conduct-like framework agreements, and for harmonisation of procedures and templates, lest the Nordic advantage in research be lost.
METHODS: Our Danish/Swedish/Norwegian research collaboration (the 3-year NordForsk-funded "NORA" project) aims to develop a personalised medicine approach for the management of RA, built on the exploitation of unique existing data sources: longitudinal data from clinical rheumatology registries, research cohorts, nationwide health care registries, and biobank material from >20 sample collections. Data and results are shared and accessed remotely by collaborators at secure servers. New biomarker assays and patient-centric implementations of the results are to be explored, validated, and disseminated to patients and health care via the development of digital tools.
RESULTS: Following the advice of legal experts at the involved academic or public institutions and private companies, GDPR compliance resulted in >20 legal documents to govern the collaboration (consortium-, joint controller-, research collaboration-, data sharing-, and a series of unique two-way data processing-, and material transfer agreements). Lack of agreed-upon templates, policies, procedures, and a shortage of legal resources have caused considerable delays. Thus, our research consortium has spent more time ensuring GDPR compliance than on actual research activities.
CONCLUSIONS: The current interpretation and implementation of the legal premises (rather than the GDPR per se) for research collaborations caused unnecessary barriers and delays. Our experiences call for Nordic trust-based code-of-conduct-like framework agreements, and for harmonisation of procedures and templates, lest the Nordic advantage in research be lost.