J Korean Med Sci.  2024 Sep;39(36):e262. 10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e262.

The Government Should Play a Role Greater Than That of Construction Supervisor in the National Bio-Big Data Infrastructure

• Shin Y
• Kim CJ

• KMID: 2559775
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2024.39.e262

Reference

1. Korean Society for Bioinformatics. Korea Genome Organization. A Petition for Reconsidering the Governance of the Korea Bioinformation Center. Forwarded to the Ministry of Science and ICT. Seoul, Korea: Korean Society for Bioinformatics, Korea Genome Organization;2023.

2. Ministry of Health and Welfare (KR). Ministry of Science and ICT (KR). Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (KR). Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. The Presentation of the Result of the Preliminary Feasibility Study on the National Integrated Bio-Big Data Construction Project. Presentation Slide. Sejong, Korea: Ministry of Health and Welfare;2023.

3. Ministry of Health and Welfare (KR). Ministry of Science and ICT (KR). Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (KR). Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. Advance Notice of Call for [the National Integrated Bio-Big Data Construction] Project. Presentation Slide. Sejong, Korea: Ministry of Health and Welfare;2023.

4. Health Data Research UK. Digital Innovation hub programme prospectus appendix: principles for participation. Updated 2020. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.hdruk.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Digital-Innovation-Hub-Programme-Prospectus-Appendix-Principles-for-Participation.pdf .

5. UK Health Data Research Alliance. An introduction to the UK Health Data Research Alliance. Presentation slide. Updated 2022. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://ukhealthdata.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/HDRUK_ALLIANCE_BROCHURE.pdf .

6. UK Biobank. UK Biobank ethics and governance framework version 3.0 (October 2007). Updated 2007. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.ukbiobank.ac.uk/media/0xsbmfmw/egf.pdf .

7. Leonelli S. Data-centric Biology: A Philosophical Study. Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press;2019.

8. Pinel C, Prainsack B, McKevitt C. Caring for data: value creation in a data-intensive research laboratory. Soc Stud Sci. 2020; 50(2):175–197. PMID: 32053062.

9. Edwards PN, Jackson SJ, Bowker GC, Knoble CP. Understanding Infrastructure: Dynamics, Tensions, and Design. NSF Grant 0630263. Alexandria, VA, USA: National Science Foundation;2007.

10. Beaulieu A, Leonelli S. Data and Society: A Critical Introduction. London, UK: SAGE Publications Ltd.;2022.

11. Hawkins AK, O’Doherty K. Biobank governance: a lesson in trust. New Genet Soc. 2010; 29(3):311–327.

12. Strasser B. Collecting Experiments: Making Big Data Biology. Chicago, IL, USA: The University of Chicago Press;2019.

13. Gottweis H, Lauss G. Biobank governance: heterogeneous modes of ordering and democratization. J Community Genet. 2012; 3(2):61–72. PMID: 22147279.

14. Yang JH, Kim JE, Lee I. Ethical considerations for return of results in genomic research. J Korean Bioethics Assoc. 2023; 24(2):69–86.

15. Harmon SHE, Yen SY, Tang SM. Biobank governance: the cautionary tale of Taiwan biobank. Scripted. 2018; 15(1):123.

16. Levitt M. UK Biobank: a model for public engagement? Genom Soc Policy. 2005; 1(3):78–81.

17. Papaioannou T. Democratic governance of genomics: the case of UK Biobank. New Genet Soc. 2012; 31(2):111–133.