Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jul;10(3):239-50.
doi: 10.1177/1556264615592383.

Sweat, Skepticism, and Uncharted Territory: A Qualitative Study of Opinions on Data Sharing Among Public Health Researchers and Research Participants in Mumbai, India

Affiliations
Free PMC article

Sweat, Skepticism, and Uncharted Territory: A Qualitative Study of Opinions on Data Sharing Among Public Health Researchers and Research Participants in Mumbai, India

Ketaki Hate et al. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Jul.
Free PMC article

Abstract

Efforts to internalize data sharing in research practice have been driven largely by developing international norms that have not incorporated opinions from researchers in low- and middle-income countries. We sought to identify the issues around ethical data sharing in the context of research involving women and children in urban India. We interviewed researchers, managers, and research participants associated with a Mumbai non-governmental organization, as well as researchers from other organizations and members of ethics committees. We conducted 22 individual semi-structured interviews and involved 44 research participants in focus group discussions. We used framework analysis to examine ideas about data and data sharing in general; its potential benefits or harms, barriers, obligations, and governance; and the requirements for consent. Both researchers and participants were generally in favor of data sharing, although limited experience amplified their reservations. We identified three themes: concerns that the work of data producers may not receive appropriate acknowledgment, skepticism about the process of sharing, and the fact that the terrain of data sharing was essentially uncharted and confusing. To increase data sharing in India, we need to provide guidelines, protocols, and examples of good practice in terms of consent, data preparation, screening of applications, and what individuals and organizations can expect in terms of validation, acknowledgment, and authorship.

Keywords: India; Mumbai; data sharing; ethics; poverty areas.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Themes emerging from analysis of opinions on data sharing among public health researchers and research participants.

Similar articles

Cited by 13 articles

References

    1. Anderson J. R., Schonfeld T. L. (2009). Data-sharing dilemmas: Allowing pharmaceutical company access to research data. Review of Human Subjects Research, 31(3), 17-19. - PubMed
    1. Attride-Stirling J. (2001). Thematic networks: An analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1, 385-405. doi:10.1177/146879410100100307 - DOI
    1. Bersoff D. N., Dawes R. M. (1992). Case vignette: To share or not to share. Ethics & Behavior, 2, 311-317. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb0204_6 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bishop L. (2009). Ethical sharing and reuse of qualitative data. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 44, 255-272.
    1. Budin-Ljøsne I., Isaeva J., Knoppers B. M., Tasse A. M., Shen H., McCarthy M. I., . . . Harris J. R. (2014). Data sharing in large research consortia: Experiences and recommendations from ENGAGE. European Journal of Human Genetics, 22, 317-321. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources