English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Introduction:  Human biological specimen (biospecimen) donation is routinely requested for clinical care and research purposes. Successfully engaging patients and research participants in biospecimen donation depends on what they understand these initiatives entail, including their perceptions of risk. Human biospecimens are stored in facilities routinely referenced as biobanks or biorepositories, both of which labels are known to embody a variety of connotations. The words chosen to describe biospecimen facilities may influence decisions about donation.  Objective:  To explore differences in likelihood of donation as a function of the words chosen to represent human biospecimen storage facilities and the commensurate concerns each label evokes.  Materials and Methods:  Two-group experimental design. Participants completed a survey about a fictitious undertaking requesting that they consider biospecimen donation. The term used to describe the facility housing the biospecimens differed; one half of the surveys referenced a biobank, and one half referenced a biorepository.  Results:  Two thousand five hundred ninety-six surveys were distributed; 586 completed surveys were received (response rate: 22.6%). Sixty-three percent of respondents, regardless of whether the label referenced a biobank or biorespository, reported being extremely likely to donate. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups on the 11 concerns sampled. Factor analyses revealed that concerns could be classified in two groups: use-related concerns and person-related concerns. The label biobank evoked significantly lower perception of importance of the person-related concerns sampled (e.g., personal or other benefit, discomfort or inconvenience).  Conclusions:  Our results suggest that researchers may consider using the word biobank to describe the facility housing the biospecimen, as this term appears less subject to concern biases. These outcomes confirm that misunderstandings or misattributions of words used to refer to biospecimen facilities could deter participation in clinical care or research. Participation may be enhanced through ensuring clear understanding of what biospecimen donation entails and by directly addressing common semantic misunderstandings and associations.

How Semantics Connotations May Influence Concerns About Donation of Biospecimens