A scoping review of human genetic resources management policies and databases in high- and middle-low-income countries.

IF 3 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS BMC Medical Ethics Pub Date : 2025-03-15 DOI:10.1186/s12910-025-01192-7
Hongwei Liu, Yin Liu, Yanyan Zhao, Yingqi Ma, Qiong Chen, Huifang Xu, Xiaoyang Wang, Xiaoli Guo, Hong Wang, Zelong Chen, Shaokai Zhang, Binbin Han
{"title":"A scoping review of human genetic resources management policies and databases in high- and middle-low-income countries.","authors":"Hongwei Liu, Yin Liu, Yanyan Zhao, Yingqi Ma, Qiong Chen, Huifang Xu, Xiaoyang Wang, Xiaoli Guo, Hong Wang, Zelong Chen, Shaokai Zhang, Binbin Han","doi":"10.1186/s12910-025-01192-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This review examines global human genetic resources management, focusing on genetic data policies and repositories in high- and middle-low-income countries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search strategy was employed across multiple databases, including official government websites and Google, to gather relevant literature on human genetic resources management policies and genetic resource databases. Documents were screened for relevance, focusing on high-income countries (United States, United Kingdom, Japan) and middle-low-income countries (China, India, Kenya). Data were extracted, coded, and analyzed to identify common themes and differences in genetic resource management practices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>High-income countries benefit from robust legal frameworks and advanced technological infrastructures. The United States enforces the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act to protect privacy and facilitate data sharing, while Japan relies on the Act on the Protection of Personal Information and ethical guidelines. Additionally, high-income countries host a variety of genetic databases and biobanks that support scientific research. In contrast, middle-low-income countries like China, India, and Kenya are still developing their frameworks. China has regulations such as the Biosecurity Law and the Regulations on the Management of Human Genetic Resources, but still requires more unified standards. India's policies focus on genetic research and data protection through the Biological Diversity Act, while Kenya seeks to improve data management through the 2019 Data Protection Act.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Significant disparities exist in human genetic resources management between high-income and middle-low-income countries. High-income countries have robust systems balancing privacy protection with research facilitation, supported by comprehensive and large-scale databases for scientific research. Middle-low-income countries need to enhance legal frameworks and build population-specific databases. Promoting equitable data sharing and adopting best practices from high-income countries are essential for advancing global scientific discovery and ensuring fair management of genetic resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":55348,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Ethics","volume":"26 1","pages":"37"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-025-01192-7","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This review examines global human genetic resources management, focusing on genetic data policies and repositories in high- and middle-low-income countries.

Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was employed across multiple databases, including official government websites and Google, to gather relevant literature on human genetic resources management policies and genetic resource databases. Documents were screened for relevance, focusing on high-income countries (United States, United Kingdom, Japan) and middle-low-income countries (China, India, Kenya). Data were extracted, coded, and analyzed to identify common themes and differences in genetic resource management practices.

Results: High-income countries benefit from robust legal frameworks and advanced technological infrastructures. The United States enforces the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act to protect privacy and facilitate data sharing, while Japan relies on the Act on the Protection of Personal Information and ethical guidelines. Additionally, high-income countries host a variety of genetic databases and biobanks that support scientific research. In contrast, middle-low-income countries like China, India, and Kenya are still developing their frameworks. China has regulations such as the Biosecurity Law and the Regulations on the Management of Human Genetic Resources, but still requires more unified standards. India's policies focus on genetic research and data protection through the Biological Diversity Act, while Kenya seeks to improve data management through the 2019 Data Protection Act.

Conclusion: Significant disparities exist in human genetic resources management between high-income and middle-low-income countries. High-income countries have robust systems balancing privacy protection with research facilitation, supported by comprehensive and large-scale databases for scientific research. Middle-low-income countries need to enhance legal frameworks and build population-specific databases. Promoting equitable data sharing and adopting best practices from high-income countries are essential for advancing global scientific discovery and ensuring fair management of genetic resources.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Medical Ethics
BMC Medical Ethics MEDICAL ETHICS-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
7.40%
发文量
108
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Ethics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in relation to the ethical aspects of biomedical research and clinical practice, including professional choices and conduct, medical technologies, healthcare systems and health policies.
期刊最新文献
A scoping review of human genetic resources management policies and databases in high- and middle-low-income countries. Balancing benefits and burdens: a systematic review on ethical and social dimensions of gene and cell therapies for hereditary blood diseases. Development and psychometric properties of the nursing ethical decision-making ability scale. "No, it is not a breach of my oath because it is beyond my control; I use the policies that are in place." Ethical challenges faced by healthcare workers in the provision of healthcare to cross-border migrants in Botswana. Evaluation of the surgical informed consent for elective and emergency surgeries in obstetrics and gynaecology in Saudi Arabia.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1