Angela Ballantyne, G. Owen Schaefer, Ainsley J. Newson, Vicki Xafis, Hui Jin Toh, Serene Ong, Tamra Lysaght, E Shyong Tai
{"title":"Trustworthy Governance of Genomic and Health-Related Data: Lessons from Singapore","authors":"Angela Ballantyne, G. Owen Schaefer, Ainsley J. Newson, Vicki Xafis, Hui Jin Toh, Serene Ong, Tamra Lysaght, E Shyong Tai","doi":"10.1007/s41649-025-00397-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Precision medicine (PM) is an approach to research and healthcare delivery driven by insights from linked genomic, epigenetic, clinical, behavioural, and environmental data. Data sharing for PM, especially between parties with divergent strategic and commercial interests, requires balancing competing values, creating a trusted data ecosystem, and maintaining social license. This paper integrates findings from normative bioethics and empirical research in Singapore to discern recommendations for guidance on the ethical governance of genomic and health data. We distil findings from mixed methods research in Singapore and map these onto Kalkman et al.’s themes and principles for data sharing. Based on our normative and empirical analyses, we argue that the values of public benefit, fairness, accountability, and transparency are critical for maintaining social license for PM in Singapore. Consent is important but insufficient to secure public trust or support for data sharing if these other normative values are not achieved. Contrary to assertions in much of the existing bioethics literature on genomic and health data sharing, we found that different consent options (such as specific versus broad consent) had little impact on social license for data sharing. Our analysis provides empirically grounded, contextually appropriate, responsive normative guidance for trustworthy data governance in Singapore. While our findings are specific to Singapore's cultural and institutional context, our methodological approach and the relative de-emphasis of individual consent models offer important insights for other jurisdictions developing PM programs, particularly in non-Western settings where collective values may take precedence over individual autonomy.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44520,"journal":{"name":"Asian Bioethics Review","volume":"18 4","pages":"847 - 868"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Bioethics Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s41649-025-00397-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Precision medicine (PM) is an approach to research and healthcare delivery driven by insights from linked genomic, epigenetic, clinical, behavioural, and environmental data. Data sharing for PM, especially between parties with divergent strategic and commercial interests, requires balancing competing values, creating a trusted data ecosystem, and maintaining social license. This paper integrates findings from normative bioethics and empirical research in Singapore to discern recommendations for guidance on the ethical governance of genomic and health data. We distil findings from mixed methods research in Singapore and map these onto Kalkman et al.’s themes and principles for data sharing. Based on our normative and empirical analyses, we argue that the values of public benefit, fairness, accountability, and transparency are critical for maintaining social license for PM in Singapore. Consent is important but insufficient to secure public trust or support for data sharing if these other normative values are not achieved. Contrary to assertions in much of the existing bioethics literature on genomic and health data sharing, we found that different consent options (such as specific versus broad consent) had little impact on social license for data sharing. Our analysis provides empirically grounded, contextually appropriate, responsive normative guidance for trustworthy data governance in Singapore. While our findings are specific to Singapore's cultural and institutional context, our methodological approach and the relative de-emphasis of individual consent models offer important insights for other jurisdictions developing PM programs, particularly in non-Western settings where collective values may take precedence over individual autonomy.
期刊介绍:
Asian Bioethics Review (ABR) is an international academic journal, based in Asia, providing a forum to express and exchange original ideas on all aspects of bioethics, especially those relevant to the region. Published quarterly, the journal seeks to promote collaborative research among scholars in Asia or with an interest in Asia, as well as multi-cultural and multi-disciplinary bioethical studies more generally. It will appeal to all working on bioethical issues in biomedicine, healthcare, caregiving and patient support, genetics, law and governance, health systems and policy, science studies and research. ABR provides analyses, perspectives and insights into new approaches in bioethics, recent changes in biomedical law and policy, developments in capacity building and professional training, and voices or essays from a student’s perspective. The journal includes articles, research studies, target articles, case evaluations and commentaries. It also publishes book reviews and correspondence to the editor. ABR welcomes original papers from all countries, particularly those that relate to Asia. ABR is the flagship publication of the Centre for Biomedical Ethics, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore. The Centre for Biomedical Ethics is a collaborating centre on bioethics of the World Health Organization.