我们未来的健康:同意、临床风险和行业问题困扰着英国有史以来最大的健康研究项目

The BMJ Pub Date : 2025-07-30 DOI:10.1136/bmj.r1579
Margaret McCartney, Deborah Cohen
{"title":"我们未来的健康:同意、临床风险和行业问题困扰着英国有史以来最大的健康研究项目","authors":"Margaret McCartney, Deborah Cohen","doi":"10.1136/bmj.r1579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The UK’s flagship health research programme promises breakthroughs, but beneath an NHS branded facade, critics are asking who really benefits from this vast database, heavily backed by industry and government. Margaret McCartney and Deborah Cohen investigate As a research programme, Our Future Health (OFH) is a runaway success—at least on paper. Described by one observer as the UK Biobank “on steroids,” OFH has become the UK’s largest ever health research programme, recruiting more than 1.5 million participants in just two years, with a goal of reaching five million.1 Its scale and ambition are praiseworthy, especially for enrolling people from ethnic minority groups and low income backgrounds—communities often overlooked in medical research. Participants are told that their data, along with access to their NHS records, will help researchers make discoveries about conditions such as dementia, cancer, and heart disease. Researchers will use only deidentified data, for purposes only for “the public good.” Participants may later be asked whether they want personal feedback from their samples, including their DNA, that could “reveal health or disease risks.” Behind the headline data, however, concerns persist. To investigate the major issues The BMJ has spoken to the programme’s chief executive, Raghib Ali, as well as its critics. The first issue is consent. Volunteers can sign up through community pharmacies, mobile units, the blood transfusion service, or an NHS branded invitation promising new insights into their blood pressure and disease risk. In exchange for personal details and blood samples they receive a £10 shopping voucher. Privacy campaigners have questioned whether participants truly understand how their genetic material will be used and whether the gift voucher could amount to undue inducement. Others warn of the risks associated with returning complex polygenic risk scores of dubious clinical utility, especially in the absence of a clear NHS plan …","PeriodicalId":22388,"journal":{"name":"The BMJ","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Our Future Health: consent, clinical risk, and industry issues plague the UK’s biggest ever health research programme\",\"authors\":\"Margaret McCartney, Deborah Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmj.r1579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The UK’s flagship health research programme promises breakthroughs, but beneath an NHS branded facade, critics are asking who really benefits from this vast database, heavily backed by industry and government. Margaret McCartney and Deborah Cohen investigate As a research programme, Our Future Health (OFH) is a runaway success—at least on paper. Described by one observer as the UK Biobank “on steroids,” OFH has become the UK’s largest ever health research programme, recruiting more than 1.5 million participants in just two years, with a goal of reaching five million.1 Its scale and ambition are praiseworthy, especially for enrolling people from ethnic minority groups and low income backgrounds—communities often overlooked in medical research. Participants are told that their data, along with access to their NHS records, will help researchers make discoveries about conditions such as dementia, cancer, and heart disease. Researchers will use only deidentified data, for purposes only for “the public good.” Participants may later be asked whether they want personal feedback from their samples, including their DNA, that could “reveal health or disease risks.” Behind the headline data, however, concerns persist. To investigate the major issues The BMJ has spoken to the programme’s chief executive, Raghib Ali, as well as its critics. The first issue is consent. Volunteers can sign up through community pharmacies, mobile units, the blood transfusion service, or an NHS branded invitation promising new insights into their blood pressure and disease risk. In exchange for personal details and blood samples they receive a £10 shopping voucher. Privacy campaigners have questioned whether participants truly understand how their genetic material will be used and whether the gift voucher could amount to undue inducement. Others warn of the risks associated with returning complex polygenic risk scores of dubious clinical utility, especially in the absence of a clear NHS plan …\",\"PeriodicalId\":22388,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The BMJ\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The BMJ\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1579\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The BMJ","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

英国的旗舰健康研究项目有望取得突破,但在NHS品牌的表象下,批评者在问,谁真正从这个由行业和政府大力支持的庞大数据库中受益。作为一个研究项目,我们的未来健康(OFH)取得了巨大的成功——至少在纸面上是这样。OFH已成为英国有史以来最大的健康研究项目,在短短两年内招募了150多万参与者,其目标是达到500万它的规模和雄心是值得称赞的,特别是招收了来自少数民族和低收入背景的人——这些群体在医学研究中经常被忽视。参与者被告知,他们的数据以及他们的NHS记录将帮助研究人员发现痴呆症、癌症和心脏病等疾病。研究人员将只使用未识别的数据,只用于“公共利益”的目的。参与者随后可能会被问及是否希望从他们的样本中获得个人反馈,包括他们的DNA,这可能会“揭示健康或疾病风险”。然而,在这些总体数据背后,担忧依然存在。为了调查主要问题,《英国医学杂志》采访了该项目的首席执行官Raghib Ali以及批评者。第一个问题是同意。志愿者可以通过社区药房、流动单位、输血服务或NHS品牌邀请来注册,这些邀请有望为他们的血压和疾病风险提供新的见解。通过提供个人信息和血液样本,他们可以获得一张价值10英镑的购物券。隐私活动人士质疑参与者是否真正了解他们的遗传物质将如何被使用,以及礼券是否会构成不当的诱惑。另一些人则警告说,返回临床用途可疑的复杂多基因风险评分会带来风险,特别是在缺乏明确的NHS计划的情况下……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Our Future Health: consent, clinical risk, and industry issues plague the UK’s biggest ever health research programme
The UK’s flagship health research programme promises breakthroughs, but beneath an NHS branded facade, critics are asking who really benefits from this vast database, heavily backed by industry and government. Margaret McCartney and Deborah Cohen investigate As a research programme, Our Future Health (OFH) is a runaway success—at least on paper. Described by one observer as the UK Biobank “on steroids,” OFH has become the UK’s largest ever health research programme, recruiting more than 1.5 million participants in just two years, with a goal of reaching five million.1 Its scale and ambition are praiseworthy, especially for enrolling people from ethnic minority groups and low income backgrounds—communities often overlooked in medical research. Participants are told that their data, along with access to their NHS records, will help researchers make discoveries about conditions such as dementia, cancer, and heart disease. Researchers will use only deidentified data, for purposes only for “the public good.” Participants may later be asked whether they want personal feedback from their samples, including their DNA, that could “reveal health or disease risks.” Behind the headline data, however, concerns persist. To investigate the major issues The BMJ has spoken to the programme’s chief executive, Raghib Ali, as well as its critics. The first issue is consent. Volunteers can sign up through community pharmacies, mobile units, the blood transfusion service, or an NHS branded invitation promising new insights into their blood pressure and disease risk. In exchange for personal details and blood samples they receive a £10 shopping voucher. Privacy campaigners have questioned whether participants truly understand how their genetic material will be used and whether the gift voucher could amount to undue inducement. Others warn of the risks associated with returning complex polygenic risk scores of dubious clinical utility, especially in the absence of a clear NHS plan …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信