Intensified and extensive data production and data storage are characteristics of contemporary western societies. Health data sharing is increasing with the growth of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) platforms devoted to the collection of personal health and genomic data. However, the sensitive and personal nature of health data poses ethical challenges when data is disclosed and shared even if for scientific research purposes.With this in mind, the Science and Values Working Group of the COST Action CHIP ME ‘Citizen's Health through public-private Initiatives: Public health, Market and Ethical perspectives’ (IS 1303) identified six core values they considered to be essential for the ethical sharing of health data using ICT platforms. We believe that using this ethical framework will promote respectful scientific practices in order to maintain individuals’ trust in research.We use these values to analyse five ICT platforms and explore how emerging data sharing platforms are reconfiguring the data sharing experience from a range of perspectives. We discuss which types of values, rights and responsibilities they entail and enshrine within their philosophy or outlook on what it means to share personal health information. Through this discussion we address issues of the design and the development process of personal health data and patient-oriented infrastructures, as well as new forms of technologically-mediated empowerment.

Informed consent is considered by many to be a moral imperative in medical research. However, it is increasingly acknowledged that in many actual instances of consent to participation in medical research, participants do not employ the provided information in their decision to consent, but rather consent based on the trust they hold in the researcher or research enterprise. In this article we explore whether trust-based consent is morally inferior to information-based consent. We analyse the moral values essential to valid consent - autonomy, voluntariness, non-manipulation, and non-exploitation - and assess whether these values are less protected and promoted by consent based on trust than they are by consent based on information. We find that this is not the case, and thus conclude that trust-based consent if not morally inferior to information-based consent.

We argue that while building and maintaining trusting relationships in research is important-not least in developing countries-strategies that serve this endeavor should be supplemented with efforts to ensure proper provision and understanding of relevant information, specifically about the nature of research and measures for individual consent and opt-out.

Most university biobanks begin like other university research projects, that is, with an idea conceived by an individual researcher in pursuit of his/her own research interests, publications, funding, and career. Some biobanks, however, come to have scientific value that goes beyond the projects that were initially responsible for the collection of the samples and data they contain. Such value may derive from among other things the uniqueness of the samples in terms of their sheer volume, the quality of the samples, the ability to link the samples with information retrieved in disease registries, or the fact that the samples represent very rare diseases. This article focuses on biobanks of this kind, and the special obligations that publicly funded universities have to ensure the sustainability of biobanks with continued scientific value. We argue that universities should adopt policies to deal with the various, diverse issues which may arise during the lifecycle of a biobank. The policies should be flexible, accommodate the freedoms of individual researchers, and reflect the multifaceted nature of biobanks. Yet they should be specific enough to provide guidance and robust enough to safeguard legal norms and ethical values. The article sets out concrete recommendations which universities should consider and act upon.

No abstract