Inclusion of American Indians and Alaskan Natives in Large National Studies: Ethical Considerations and Implications for Biospecimen Collection in the HEALthy Brain and Child Development Study

Abstract

This manuscript is the result of an interdisciplinary team approach to examine the ethical and cultural considerations of biospecimen collection among American Indian and Alaskan Native (AIAN) communities for the planned Healthy Brain and Child Development (HBCD) study. We begin by reviewing a brief history of the treatment of AIAN communities by the US government and within research studies. Based in part on this history, we highlight the overlapping and intersecting vulnerabilities of AIAN communities, including historical trauma, poverty, lack of healthcare access, and environmental hazards. After consideration of ethical and legal implications, we introduce our recommendations for biospecimen collection/biobanking with AIAN communities in the context of population-representative, multi-site, national studies. We recommend the following key considerations: (1) authentic partnership development; (2) beneficence to the community; (3) culturally respectful research design; (4) meaningful consent to support enrollment and retention; (5) culturally appropriate data management. Adherence to a culturally aware approach for inclusion of underrepresented communities assures external validity in the national studies and increases likelihood of bidirectional value exchange.

Increasing diversity in developmental cognitive neuroscience: A roadmap for increasing representation in pediatric neuroimaging research

“…A number of reviews have outlined strategies for recruiting participants from under-represented backgrounds, and overcoming mistrust commonly experienced by these communities in relation to scientific research ( Arredondo, 2021 , Bakhireva et al, 2020 , Haack et al, 2014 , Hartmann et al, 2014 , Rivas-Drake et al, 2016 , Rowley and Camacho, 2015 ). In Table 1 , we provide a summary of strategies researchers may use at each research stage (e.g., design, data collection, post-publication) to build trust within targeted communities.…”

An Idealized Clinicogenomic Registry to Engage Underrepresented Populations Using Innovative Technology

“…Recently, patients and research participants from underserved populations have begun to advocate for property rights in, and even compensation for, the use of their health data provided in the course of research [ 26 , 27 ]. Mikk et al argue that a patient more actively engaged with their data is likely to result in personal and social benefits in the form of better adherence and outcomes [ 28 ].…”

Neuroimaging data repositories and AI-driven healthcare—Global aspirations vs. ethical considerations in machine learning models of neurological disease

“…This reflects the maturity of such systems to (i) support legal and regulatory frameworks protecting the rights and expectations of individuals to data privacy [e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), 1 General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2 ], whilst (ii) promoting solidarity in accepting personal risks to contribute to societal needs for scientific discovery. Accordingly, examples of brain repositories and data sharing initiatives [ADNI (Petersen et al, 2010 ), HBCD (Bakhireva et al, 2020 ; Morris et al, 2020 ), HBP (Amunts et al, 2019 ), CBRS (Illes et al, 2019 ), CONP (Poline et al, 2023 ), UK Biobank (Sudlow et al, 2015 ), etc.] are mainly from North America, Europe, and the United Kingdom (UK).…”