{"title":"对研究基础设施的需求:生物银行大规模研究基础设施的述评。","authors":"Anthony Larsson","doi":"10.1089/bio.2016.0103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distributed Research Infrastructures are gaining political traction in Europe to facilitate scientific research. This development has gained particular momentum in the area of biobanking where cross-national attempts have been made toward harmonizing the biobanking standards across the European Union through the establishment of the organization BBMRI (BioBanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure). BBMRI exists as separate national nodes across several European countries, although Sweden took on a pioneering role in its early stages. Thus, the Swedish node, BBMRI.se, was set up in 2009.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To document publications addressing the current debate on large-scale distributed medical and/or biobank Research Infrastructures and identify the most pressing issues discussed by these articles through a narrative review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Web of Science (WOS) and PubMed databases were searched to find prior studies of large-scale medical Research Infrastructures, with no limits set with regard to study design and/or time period. All identified articles published up until March 2016 were included in the initial review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 145 articles were retrieved from WOS and PubMed, though merely 17 ultimately made it past the final exclusion criteria. About two-thirds of the articles listed a first author affiliated to a European country. The articles most commonly discussed the need for developing and expanding the use of \"infrastructures.\"</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>The future of scientific research will call for a deeper and more widespread multidisciplinary collaboration. This will emphasize the need of research seeking to optimize the preconditions of securing sustainable scientific collaboration. Future investigators will thus need to understand the components and mechanisms of Research Infrastructures in addition to acquiring knowledge of how to build, manage, brand, and promote them as well.</p>","PeriodicalId":49231,"journal":{"name":"Biopreservation and Biobanking","volume":"15 4","pages":"375-383"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/bio.2016.0103","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Need for Research Infrastructures: A Narrative Review of Large-Scale Research Infrastructures in Biobanking.\",\"authors\":\"Anthony Larsson\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/bio.2016.0103\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Distributed Research Infrastructures are gaining political traction in Europe to facilitate scientific research. This development has gained particular momentum in the area of biobanking where cross-national attempts have been made toward harmonizing the biobanking standards across the European Union through the establishment of the organization BBMRI (BioBanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure). BBMRI exists as separate national nodes across several European countries, although Sweden took on a pioneering role in its early stages. Thus, the Swedish node, BBMRI.se, was set up in 2009.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To document publications addressing the current debate on large-scale distributed medical and/or biobank Research Infrastructures and identify the most pressing issues discussed by these articles through a narrative review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Web of Science (WOS) and PubMed databases were searched to find prior studies of large-scale medical Research Infrastructures, with no limits set with regard to study design and/or time period. All identified articles published up until March 2016 were included in the initial review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 145 articles were retrieved from WOS and PubMed, though merely 17 ultimately made it past the final exclusion criteria. About two-thirds of the articles listed a first author affiliated to a European country. The articles most commonly discussed the need for developing and expanding the use of \\\"infrastructures.\\\"</p><p><strong>Practical implications: </strong>The future of scientific research will call for a deeper and more widespread multidisciplinary collaboration. This will emphasize the need of research seeking to optimize the preconditions of securing sustainable scientific collaboration. Future investigators will thus need to understand the components and mechanisms of Research Infrastructures in addition to acquiring knowledge of how to build, manage, brand, and promote them as well.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biopreservation and Biobanking\",\"volume\":\"15 4\",\"pages\":\"375-383\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1089/bio.2016.0103\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biopreservation and Biobanking\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2016.0103\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/2/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biopreservation and Biobanking","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/bio.2016.0103","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/2/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CELL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13
摘要
背景:分布式研究基础设施在欧洲获得了促进科学研究的政治牵引力。这一发展在生物银行领域获得了特别的动力,通过建立组织BBMRI(生物银行和生物分子资源研究基础设施),跨国尝试在整个欧盟范围内协调生物银行标准。BBMRI作为独立的国家节点存在于几个欧洲国家,尽管瑞典在其早期阶段发挥了先锋作用。因此,瑞典淋巴结,BBMRI。Se,成立于2009年。目的:记录有关当前关于大规模分布式医疗和/或生物库研究基础设施的辩论的出版物,并通过叙述性审查确定这些文章讨论的最紧迫问题。方法:检索Web of Science (WOS)和PubMed数据库,查找大规模医学研究基础设施的先前研究,没有对研究设计和/或时间段设置限制。在2016年3月之前发表的所有确定的文章都被纳入初步审查。结果:从WOS和PubMed中共检索到145篇文章,尽管只有17篇最终通过了最终的排除标准。大约三分之二的文章列出了隶属于欧洲国家的第一作者。这些文章最常讨论的是开发和扩展“基础设施”使用的必要性。实际意义:未来的科学研究将需要更深入、更广泛的多学科合作。这将强调需要进行研究,力求优化确保可持续科学合作的先决条件。因此,未来的研究者将需要了解研究基础设施的组成部分和机制,以及如何建立、管理、品牌和推广它们的知识。
The Need for Research Infrastructures: A Narrative Review of Large-Scale Research Infrastructures in Biobanking.
Background: Distributed Research Infrastructures are gaining political traction in Europe to facilitate scientific research. This development has gained particular momentum in the area of biobanking where cross-national attempts have been made toward harmonizing the biobanking standards across the European Union through the establishment of the organization BBMRI (BioBanking and Biomolecular Resources Research Infrastructure). BBMRI exists as separate national nodes across several European countries, although Sweden took on a pioneering role in its early stages. Thus, the Swedish node, BBMRI.se, was set up in 2009.
Purpose: To document publications addressing the current debate on large-scale distributed medical and/or biobank Research Infrastructures and identify the most pressing issues discussed by these articles through a narrative review.
Methods: The Web of Science (WOS) and PubMed databases were searched to find prior studies of large-scale medical Research Infrastructures, with no limits set with regard to study design and/or time period. All identified articles published up until March 2016 were included in the initial review.
Results: A total of 145 articles were retrieved from WOS and PubMed, though merely 17 ultimately made it past the final exclusion criteria. About two-thirds of the articles listed a first author affiliated to a European country. The articles most commonly discussed the need for developing and expanding the use of "infrastructures."
Practical implications: The future of scientific research will call for a deeper and more widespread multidisciplinary collaboration. This will emphasize the need of research seeking to optimize the preconditions of securing sustainable scientific collaboration. Future investigators will thus need to understand the components and mechanisms of Research Infrastructures in addition to acquiring knowledge of how to build, manage, brand, and promote them as well.
期刊介绍:
Biopreservation and Biobanking is the first journal to provide a unifying forum for the peer-reviewed communication of recent advances in the emerging and evolving field of biospecimen procurement, processing, preservation and banking, distribution, and use. The Journal publishes a range of original articles focusing on current challenges and problems in biopreservation, and advances in methods to address these issues related to the processing of macromolecules, cells, and tissues for research.
In a new section dedicated to Emerging Markets and Technologies, the Journal highlights the emergence of new markets and technologies that are either adopting or disrupting the biobank framework as they imprint on society. The solutions presented here are anticipated to help drive innovation within the biobank community.
Biopreservation and Biobanking also explores the ethical, legal, and societal considerations surrounding biobanking and biorepository operation. Ideas and practical solutions relevant to improved quality, efficiency, and sustainability of repositories, and relating to their management, operation and oversight are discussed as well.