About us
Learn how GA4GH helps expand responsible genomic data use to benefit human health.
Learn how GA4GH helps expand responsible genomic data use to benefit human health.
Our Strategic Road Map defines strategies, standards, and policy frameworks to support responsible global use of genomic and related health data.
Discover how a meeting of 50 leaders in genomics and medicine led to an alliance uniting more than 5,000 individuals and organisations to benefit human health.
GA4GH Inc. is a not-for-profit organisation that supports the global GA4GH community.
The GA4GH Council, consisting of the Executive Committee, Strategic Leadership Committee, and Product Steering Committee, guides our collaborative, globe-spanning alliance.
The Funders Forum brings together organisations that offer both financial support and strategic guidance.
The EDI Advisory Group responds to issues raised in the GA4GH community, finding equitable, inclusive ways to build products that benefit diverse groups.
Distributed across a number of Host Institutions, our staff team supports the mission and operations of GA4GH.
Curious who we are? Meet the people and organisations across six continents who make up GA4GH.
More than 500 organisations connected to genomics — in healthcare, research, patient advocacy, industry, and beyond — have signed onto the mission and vision of GA4GH as Organisational Members.
These core Organisational Members are genomic data initiatives that have committed resources to guide GA4GH work and pilot our products.
This subset of Organisational Members whose networks or infrastructure align with GA4GH priorities has made a long-term commitment to engaging with our community.
Local and national organisations assign experts to spend at least 30% of their time building GA4GH products.
Anyone working in genomics and related fields is invited to participate in our inclusive community by creating and using new products.
Wondering what GA4GH does? Learn how we find and overcome challenges to expanding responsible genomic data use for the benefit of human health.
Study Groups define needs. Participants survey the landscape of the genomics and health community and determine whether GA4GH can help.
Work Streams create products. Community members join together to develop technical standards, policy frameworks, and policy tools that overcome hurdles to international genomic data use.
GIF solves problems. Organisations in the forum pilot GA4GH products in real-world situations. Along the way, they troubleshoot products, suggest updates, and flag additional needs.
NIF finds challenges and opportunities in genomics at a global scale. National programmes meet to share best practices, avoid incompatabilities, and help translate genomics into benefits for human health.
Communities of Interest find challenges and opportunities in areas such as rare disease, cancer, and infectious disease. Participants pinpoint real-world problems that would benefit from broad data use.
The Technical Alignment Subcommittee (TASC) supports harmonisation, interoperability, and technical alignment across GA4GH products.
Find out what’s happening with up to the minute meeting schedules for the GA4GH community.
See all our products — always free and open-source. Do you work on cloud genomics, data discovery, user access, data security or regulatory policy and ethics? Need to represent genomic, phenotypic, or clinical data? We’ve got a solution for you.
All GA4GH standards, frameworks, and tools follow the Product Development and Approval Process before being officially adopted.
Learn how other organisations have implemented GA4GH products to solve real-world problems.
Help us transform the future of genomic data use! See how GA4GH can benefit you — whether you’re using our products, writing our standards, subscribing to a newsletter, or more.
Help create new global standards and frameworks for responsible genomic data use.
Align your organisation with the GA4GH mission and vision.
Want to advance both your career and responsible genomic data sharing at the same time? See our open leadership opportunities.
Join our international team and help us advance genomic data use for the benefit of human health.
Share your thoughts on all GA4GH products currently open for public comment.
Solve real problems by aligning your organisation with the world’s genomics standards. We offer software dvelopers both customisable and out-of-the-box solutions to help you get started.
Learn more about upcoming GA4GH events. See reports and recordings from our past events.
Speak directly to the global genomics and health community while supporting GA4GH strategy.
Be the first to hear about the latest GA4GH products, upcoming meetings, new initiatives, and more.
Questions? We would love to hear from you.
Read news, stories, and insights from the forefront of genomic and clinical data use.
Attend an upcoming GA4GH event, or view meeting reports from past events.
See new projects, updates, and calls for support from the Work Streams.
Read academic papers coauthored by GA4GH contributors.
Listen to our podcast OmicsXchange, featuring discussions from leaders in the world of genomics, health, and data sharing.
Check out our videos, then subscribe to our YouTube channel for more content.
View the latest GA4GH updates, Genomics and Health News, Implementation Notes, GDPR Briefs, and more.
Discover all things GA4GH: explore our news, events, videos, podcasts, announcements, publications, and newsletters.
30 Sep 2019
For genomic data to meet their potential to improve human health and medicine, DNA donors must be willing to share their data for secondary use. But what factors impact a person’s willingness to trust an individual or organization enough to share their data with them? A study recently published by the Participant Values Task Team of the GA4GH Regulatory and Ethics Work Stream answers this question by identifying key components of trust.
For genomic data to meet their potential to improve human health and medicine, DNA donors must be willing to share their data for secondary use. But what factors impact a person’s willingness to trust an individual or organization enough to share their data with them? A study recently published by the Participant Values Task Team of the GA4GH Regulatory and Ethics Work Stream answers this question by identifying key components of trust.
“Trust is so important in gathering data,” explained Anna Middleton, Head of Social Science and Ethics at the Wellcome Genome Campus. “If we want to see scientific and medical breakthroughs, we’re going to need people to trust us—their doctors, researchers, governments—enough to share their very personal information with us.”
Middleton led the team in developing Your DNA, Your Say, an online survey to gauge global public attitudes towards genomic data sharing and identify factors that encourage or discourage sharing. The survey and accompanying videos have been translated into 14 languages and distributed among publics across the globe. To date, the team has received responses from 35,000 individuals worldwide, including representative public audiences from 22 countries.
The new paper focuses on a subset of the larger, global cohort, presenting data from approximately 9,000 English-speaking survey respondents from the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, and Australia. Ultimately, this and other publications from the study aim to provide insight into approaches that can increase the overall volume and diversity of genomic data.
The researchers evaluated participants based on their familiarity with genetics, opinions and concerns regarding sharing their medical information, and experiences with sharing personal information online. They also collected information about participants’ trust in different types of professionals and organizations, as well as how effective legal protections against exploitation of health data are at assuaging fears about the risks of sharing. The researchers identified three groups among survey responses—low, variable and high levels of trust—with the large majority of respondents falling into the low and variable trust groups. People in each category were more likely to have some characteristics in common.
“Unsurprisingly, the most trusting participants were primarily young, males with children, from the USA, who have some personal experience or familiarity with genetics,” said Middleton, noting that people of this demographic are the most represented in genetic research, commercial genetics, and policy development.
“People who said they have had negative experiences with sharing personal information online were more likely to be in the high trust class,” said Richard Milne, Senior Social Scientist at the Wellcome Genome Campus, who coordinates analysis for the Your DNA, Your Say project. “These people have shared their data, made themselves vulnerable, had something bad happen, and continued to share data and trust anyways.”
In explanation, Milne suggested that perhaps these people understand the risk inherent to the data-sharing process, but believe the benefits to research and healthcare outweigh the potential costs.
“The surveyed participants who fell in the low and variable trust classes were more likely to express concerns of data misuse within government and law enforcement, and were generally distrustful of companies using their data,” explained Middleton. “Those who are reluctant to share their data also are not reassured by laws or regulations in place to protect their data from misuse.”
The researchers also note that participants, regardless of trust class, were more willing to share their data with their own medical doctor than with other doctors in their country or researchers of any kind.
These findings have the potential to steer efforts to increase trust—and eventually data sharing—toward the exam room rather than the courtroom. In this sense, Middleton said, “clinicians have a significant responsibility to introduce the concepts of data sharing and genomics to their patients, and to clearly explain the benefits and risks of doing so. Participants have a choice in whether to donate their data to start with, and we found that being aware of the risks doesn’t appear to impact their willingness to donate.”
“We should focus on making clear how genomic data sharing may benefit healthcare and medicine, as well as being more transparent about the ways in which your data can be sourced and used,” said Milne.
Discussing the reality and severity of the risks associated with sharing personal data, along with what actions can be taken if these risks do occur, could also help the general public to make more informed decisions about sharing their data.
“We know that the public mostly gets ideas about how genomic data can be used from popular culture and media,” said Middleton. “This suggests that mass genomics literacy programmes (e.g., educating the public on how sequencing is done and the biochemistry of DNA) are not likely to help increase participation in genetic research. Instead, scientists could play a role in ‘socialising’ genomics by responding to misinformation in the media.”
The researchers are now in the process of analyzing the broader set of international data, to provide a better understanding of factors that influence public trust in genomic data sharing within different cultures and contexts. The authors also hope to publish additional findings detailing trends in trust by nation and language.
Middleton, Milne, and other Your DNA, Your Say contributors will share more details on their findings at the GA4GH 7th Plenary Meeting.