Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Attitude towards donation of the excised foreskin after circumcision surgery for research: A study from Madinah, Saudi Arabia

  • Omar F. Khabour ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    khabour@just.edu.jo

    Affiliation Department of Medical Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan

    ⨯
  • Waleed H. Mahallawi,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Medical Laboratory Technology Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Aiman I. Ali,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Medical Laboratory Technology Department, College of Applied Medical Sciences, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Hamdi H. Almaramhy,

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Validation, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Pediatric Surgery Division, Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Abdulaziz M. Bakhsh,

    Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Urology Department, College of Medicine, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia

    ⨯
  • Ahmed Abu-Siniyeh

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Department of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, Faculty of Science, The University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan

    ⨯

Abstract

Studies have shown the possibility of using the part of the foreskin removed after circumcision in the field of scientific and therapeutic research. Donations of tissues and organs are always associated with ethical challenges posed by bioethicists and societies to ensure the appropriate use of these tissues/organs. The purpose of this study was to understand the attitudes and awareness of parents/guardians regarding donation of excised foreskin to research and medical use. The study was based on a questionnaire and included 133 parents/guardians who visited Uhud Children’s Hospital in Madinah, Saudi Arabia for newborn male circumcision. The results showed a high willingness (61.7%) to donate the extracted foreskin to research. The willingness to donate the extracted foreskin to research associated with undergraduate degree (P = 0.018), male sex (P = 0.011), high income (P = 0.029), and participation in previous research studies (P = 0.002). About 41.8% were convinced that written informed consent should be obtained before circumcision surgery, 38.1% (n = 51) were convinced that written informed consent should be taken after surgery, while the remaining 19.4% reported that the timing of written informed consent is unimportant. Finally, fear of excision of excess tissue (74.5%), lack of confidence in the research (68.6%), and potential for commercial use (64.7%) were the main barriers to unwillingness to donate the excised foreskin for research. In conclusion, a reasonable portion of Saudis agreed to donate their foreskin for research purposes. There is an urgent need to enhance awareness and attitudes towards tissue donation for research and therapeutic use.

Citation: Khabour OF, Mahallawi WH, Ali AI, Almaramhy HH, Bakhsh AM, Abu-Siniyeh A (2023) Attitude towards donation of the excised foreskin after circumcision surgery for research: A study from Madinah, Saudi Arabia. PLoS ONE 18(10): e0293366. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293366

Editor: Raja R. Nandyal, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, UNITED STATES

Received: June 8, 2023; Accepted: October 10, 2023; Published: October 24, 2023

Copyright: © 2023 Khabour et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

The foreskin is defined as a continuation of skin from the shaft of the penis that covers the urethral meatus and glans penis [1]. In male circumcision, the foreskin is surgically removed from the penis. Circumcision is one of the most common practices around the world, which is routinely performed to adhere to the teaching of Prophet Abraham. There is a general belief that performing such a practice does not violate human integrity nor cause any kind of moral inadequacy [2].

Foreskin cells are a source for embryonic stem cells. Foreskin cells have shown the ability to develop into a stable cell line of any of the three embryonic germ layers under in vitro conditions [3, 4]. In addition, foreskin cells have been shown to be useful as a model for studying cellular damage and mitochondrial disfunction [5, 6]. Moreover, the foreskin has been shown to be a good source for mesenchymal stromal cells that have several immunotherapeutic applications [7–9]. Finally, stem cells derived from foreskin have diverse therapeutic potential for many conditions including periodontal diseases, skin damage, and neurodegenerative diseases [10–14].

The medical importance of male circumcision has created a vital opportunity for bioethicists and medicinal parties to define the moral significance of circumcision through the principles of bioethics context [15]. In a Korean study, authors encouraged further clinical research on the biological description of the foreskin. The study also recommended that the potential benefits and disadvantages of circumcision be disclosed to the parents [16]. By assessing the parents’ knowledge, the recommendation came to demand the improvement of education, circumcision culture and foreskin issues in society [17]. Thus, it is important to understand the attitude and perception of the population towards donations of embryonic stem cells for research and medical use [18–20]. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate parents’ perception of donating foreskin for research and its beneficial influences in the therapeutic field.

Methods

The study participants

The study is quantitative and cross-sectional in design. The study procedure was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Applied Medical Sciences, Taibah University, Saudi Arabia (Ref No. MLT 2021–050). Parents/guardians who visited Children Hospital in Madinah city/Saudi Arabia for newborn male circumcision were invited to participate in the study. A convenient (non-probabilistic) sampling approach was adopted. Adult parents/guardians who visited the circumcision clinic were invited to volunteer in the study. Sample size was estimated using G-Power 3.1 (Universitat Kiel/Germany) based on a medium effect size, an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.95. The minimum required number of subjects was 111. A total of 200 subjects were invited to participate, of whom 133 volunteered in the study. The response rate was 66.5%. Informed consent was taken from all participants after a full explanation of the study goals.

The study instrument

The study questionnaire was developed based on previous studies that examined people’s attitudes toward donating tissue for research [21–23]. The first part of the instrument asked questions about general demographics. This includes age (stratified at approximately 10-year intervals), gender (male, female), education (<high school, high school, diploma, and university degree), place of living (city vs. village), income, and history of participation in previous studies (yes vs. no). Household income in Saudi Arabia Riyale (SAR) was divided into low (<7000), medium (>7000–15000), and high (>15000). The second domain asked participants about their willingness to donate the excised foreskin for research. This was inferred by the question: Are you willing to donate the excised foreskin for research? The given choices were “Yes” and “No”. As for the third domain, we asked about the reasons for refusing to donate the excised foreskin for research. Participants were presented with five items with a choice of “Yes” or “No”. The items were: lack of trust in research, potential for non-research use of tissue, fear of excision more tissues than it should be, potential for commercial use and conflict of ownership. The instrument was revised by three experts in the field and pilot tested on 20 participants. The final version of the instrument was prepared and administered using “Google Forms” and filled out using a tablet. Data were collected during the period from April 2021 to October 2021. The collected data was accessed and processed during the first quarter of 2022. Study data is available as S1 File.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was computed using SPSS software, version 21. Demographic variables were expressed as frequencies and percentages. A binary regression model was used to analyze factors associated with willingness to donate foreskin for research. An alpha of less than 0.05 was used as the threshold for statistical differences.

Results

The study included 133 parents/guardians who visited Children’s Hospital in Madinah, Saudi Arabia, for newborn male circumcision. Participant demographics are shown in Table 1. The majority were males (55.6%), living in the city (68.4%), less than 50 years old (76.7%) and had not previously volunteered in research (54.9%). Less than half (48.9%) have an income less than 7000 SAR and about a third have a university degree. About a quarter of the participants (n = 36, 27.1%) believed that they own the excised foreskin of their newborn. Of the sample, 82 (61.7%) agreed to donate the excised foreskin after circumcision surgery for research purposes.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Characteristics of the participants.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293366.t001

Table 2 shows a cross tabulation of demographic factors with willingness to donate excised foreskin for research. The results showed significant associations between willingness to donate foreskin tissue for research and education, gender, income, and previous research participation. Higher willingness to donate associated with university degree (P = 0.018), male gender (P = 0.011), high income (P = 0.029), and prior research participation (P = 0.002). Binary regression analysis (Table 3) showed that prior research participation was related to the willingness to donate foreskin for the research (odd ratio: 0.257 and 95% C.I. [0.115–0.575]).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Cross-tabulation of demographics of participants with agreeing to donate excised foreskin to research.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293366.t002

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Binary regression analysis of factors that affect donation of excised foreskin to research.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293366.t003

Participants were asked about the informed consent process for the donation of the excised foreskin for research. About 41.8% (n = 56), believed that written informed consent should be taken before circumcision surgery, while 38.1% (n = 51) believed that written informed consent should be taken after surgery. On the hand, the rest 19.4% (n = 26) reported that the timing of written informed consent is not important.

Participants were asked about applications of excised foreskin tissue. Most of the participants agreed on the use of excised tissue in environmental research (85.0%), genetic testing (83.5%), toxicological studies (82.7%), vaccine research (86.5%), and stem cells therapeutic research (86.5%).

Table 4 showed the reasons behind the unwillingness to donate the excised foreskin for research. Fear of excision of extra tissues (74.5%), lack of trust in the research (68.6%), and potential of commercial use (64.7%) were the main reasons behind such unwillingness.

thumbnail
Download:
Table 4. Reasons for refusing donating foreskin for research.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0293366.t004

Discussion

In the current study, the majority of participants (61.7%) agreed to donate excised foreskin from their newborn sons after circumcision surgery for research purposes. In addition, they agreed on the use of excised tissue in environmental research, genetic testing, toxicological studies, vaccine research, and stem cell research. The usual procedure for managing the extracted foreskin is to dispose of it in the biological waste, but some studies have revealed the huge potential of foreskin cells as an important resource for medical research. It has been shown that the foreskin contains a variety of valuable cells including fibroblasts, the primary cell that combines connective tissue. It also acts as an important pathogenic/diagnostic model of microorganisms and as a model for the examination of medications [24]. Several studies revealed that human foreskin cells could generate stem cells for tissue repair and renewal, and for the treatment of diseases [11, 25, 26].

Willingness to donate tissue for research has been examined by several studies from different parts of the world. In the current study about two-thirds of the participants were willing to donate the excised foreskin for research. This finding is consistent with a previous study conducted in Saudi Arabia that examined the public’s willingness to participate in a dental biorepository for research purposes [27]. In a study of donors from the Portuguese Public Bank of Gametes donors, the majority agreed to donate their gametes for research [28]. In a study from Germany, about 77% of the participants agreed to donate their eyes for research after death [29]. Similarly, about 77% of immigrant population in the USA reported a willingness to donate tissue for research purposes [30]. The same level of willingness to donate tissue for research has been reported was in countries such as Canada, Sweden, Nigeria, and Jordan [31–34]. In Poland, the willingness to donate tissue for research has been to vary according to tissue type ranging from 74% for urine samples to 20% for post-mortem brain fragments [35]. According to previous literature most populations were positive about tissue donation for research.

Willingness to donate foreskin tissue for research was found to be associated with educational level (university degree), male gender, higher income, and previous research participation. In a study conducted in Saudi Arabia, education, female gender, previous participation in medical research, and higher income were found to be associated with tissue donations for dental research [27]. Thus, the current findings are consistent with what was previously reported in Saudi Arabia. Gender difference in willingness to donate gametes for research has been reported in a study conducted in Portugal [28]. Regarding income, studies have shown that individuals with higher economic status were more positive towards tissue donation and toward participation in cancer clinical trials [36–38]. Educated people and those with experience in research participation are expected to be more aware of the importance of research in advancing knowledge and healthcare. People of lower economic status may believe that tissue donation may add an additional financial burden that they cannot afford. More research is needed to evaluate such speculations. Specific factors associated with willingness to donate tissue for research can be used through educational interventions to encourage tissue donation for research in the country.

Nearly more than a third of the participants (41.8%) deemed that written informed consent to donate the excised foreskin for research should be taken before the circumcision surgery, while 38.1% believed that consent should be taken after the surgery. On the other hand, the rest were neutral regarding the timing of informed consent. If the foreskin is donated for research, the excised foreskin may need to be transferred directly to appropriate media to maintain the health of the donated tissue. However, measures should be taken to avoid excision of excess foreskin tissues beyond the recommended if parents/guardian consent to tissues donation. It is worth to mentions that several studies in the MENA region, including Saudi Arabia, were reviewed, and discussed the importance of informed consent and its applicability in this region. Issues of culture, religion, and lack of legislation were among the challenges of the informed consent in the MENA region [39–41].

In the current study, among the reasons underlying refusal to donate the excised foreskin for research were fear of excision of excess tissue, lack of trust, and possibilities of commercial use. Trust has been reported by several studies to be crucial for tissue donation and participation in research and clinical trials [28, 42, 43]. For example, a study that was conducted in Poland showed that the willingness to donate tissue for research was mostly shaped by social trust in physicians and scientists [35]. The possibility of commercial use can also shape the willingness for research participation [44–46]. For example, in a study that examined the willingness of the Swiss public to participate and donate tissue to biobanks, the potential for misuse of donated tissue for commercial or marketing purpose was among the determinants of the willingness [46]. Thus, taking such determinants into account may enhance tissue donation for research. Implementation of educational interventions can greatly enhance population awareness of tissue donation for research and clinical use [47].

Among the limitations of the current investigation is that the study was conducted in one city in Saudi Arabia. It is recommended in future studies to expand the study to include other cities in the Kingdom. This cross-sectional study adopted a qualitative approach. Adopting a qualitative approach could in the future explore in depth the reasons behind unwillingness to donate tissue for research.

Conclusion

A satisfactory segment of the Saudi population was positive regarding donation of the foreskin for research. This positive attitude was associated with the education level, income, and previous research participation. Educational interventions can enhance the willingness to tissue donations and participation in scientific research.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Taibah University, Jordan University of Science and Technology, and the RCR program in Jordan for their support.

References

  1. 1. Ventura F, Caputo F, Licata M, Bonsignore A, Ciliberti R. Male circumcision: ritual, science and responsibility. Annali dell’Istituto superiore di sanita. 2020;56(3):351–8. Epub 2020/09/23. pmid:32959801.
  2. 2. Moosa S, Muhammad AA, Dogar S, Iftikhar S, Johnson W, Latif A, et al. Implementation of an infant male circumcision programme, Pakistan. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2021;99(4):250–8. Epub 2021/05/07. pmid:33953442; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8085631.
  3. 3. Somuncu Ö S, Taşlı PN, Şişli HB, Somuncu S, Şahin F. Characterization and Differentiation of Stem Cells Isolated from Human Newborn Foreskin Tissue. Applied biochemistry and biotechnology. 2015;177(5):1040–54. Epub 2015/08/26. pmid:26304127.
  4. 4. Erdlenbruch F, Rohwedel J, Ralfs P, Thomitzek A, Kramer J, Cakiroglu F. Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from human foreskin fibroblasts. Stem cell research. 2018;33:79–82. Epub 2018/10/16. pmid:30321832.
  5. 5. Nadalutti CA, Wilson SH. Using Human Primary Foreskin Fibroblasts to Study Cellular Damage and Mitochondrial Dysfunction. Current protocols in toxicology. 2020;86(1):e99. Epub 2020/11/18. pmid:33202115; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7757388.
  6. 6. Nadalutti CA, Stefanick DF, Zhao ML, Horton JK, Prasad R, Brooks AM, et al. Mitochondrial dysfunction and DNA damage accompany enhanced levels of formaldehyde in cultured primary human fibroblasts. Scientific reports. 2020;10(1):5575. Epub 2020/03/30. pmid:32221313; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7101401.
  7. 7. Najar M, Lagneaux L. Foreskin as a source of immunotherapeutic mesenchymal stromal cells. Immunotherapy. 2017;9(2):207–17. Epub 2017/01/28. pmid:28128711.
  8. 8. Tai C, Xie Z, Li Y, Feng Y, Xie Y, Yang H, et al. Human skin dermis-derived fibroblasts are a kind of functional mesenchymal stromal cells: judgements from surface markers, biological characteristics, to therapeutic efficacy. Cell & bioscience. 2022;12(1):105. Epub 2022/07/14. pmid:35831878; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9277801.
  9. 9. Najar M, Merimi M, Faour WH, Lombard CA, Moussa Agha D, Ouhaddi Y, et al. In Vitro Cellular and Molecular Interplay between Human Foreskin-Derived Mesenchymal Stromal/Stem Cells and the Th17 Cell Pathway. Pharmaceutics. 2021;13(10). Epub 2021/10/24. pmid:34684029; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8537928.
  10. 10. Tassi SA, Sergio NZ, Misawa MYO, Villar CC. Efficacy of stem cells on periodontal regeneration: Systematic review of pre-clinical studies. Journal of periodontal research. 2017;52(5):793–812. Epub 2017/04/11. pmid:28394043.
  11. 11. Xin Y, Xu P, Wang X, Chen Y, Zhang Z, Zhang Y. Human foreskin-derived dermal stem/progenitor cell-conditioned medium combined with hyaluronic acid promotes extracellular matrix regeneration in diabetic wounds. Stem cell research & therapy. 2021;12(1):49. Epub 2021/01/11. pmid:33422138; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7796620.
  12. 12. Zhang S, Xiao T, Yu Y, Qiao Y, Xu Z, Geng J, et al. The extracellular matrix enriched with membrane metalloendopeptidase and insulin-degrading enzyme suppresses the deposition of amyloid-beta peptide in Alzheimer’s disease cell models. Journal of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. 2019;13(10):1759–69. Epub 2019/06/01. pmid:31151136.
  13. 13. Shahbazi E, Moradi S, Nemati S, Satarian L, Basiri M, Gourabi H, et al. Conversion of Human Fibroblasts to Stably Self-Renewing Neural Stem Cells with a Single Zinc-Finger Transcription Factor. Stem cell reports. 2016;6(4):539–51. Epub 2016/04/08. pmid:27052315; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4834053.
  14. 14. Erdem Koc G, Gokcimen A, Sahin F. The Effect of Boric Acid and Sodium Pentaborate Pentahydrate-Treated Foreskin Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cells on Liver Fibrosis. Biological trace element research. 2023. Epub 2023/02/04. pmid:36735212.
  15. 15. Bedzow I. Male circumcision as an example of bioethics as (immaterial) social ethics. Ethics, medicine and public health. 2020;14:100519.
  16. 16. Oh SJ, Kim KD, Kim KM, Kim KS, Kim KK, Kim JS, et al. Knowledge and attitudes of Korean parents towards their son’s circumcision: a nationwide questionnaire study. BJU international. 2002;89(4):426–32. Epub 2002/03/02. pmid:11872037.
  17. 17. Cooblal AS, Rampersad B. About the Foreskin: Parents’ Perceptions and Misconceptions. The West Indian medical journal. 2014;63(5):484–9. Epub 2015/03/18. pmid:25781287; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4655674.
  18. 18. Screnci M, Murgi E, Pirrè G, Valente E, Gesuiti P, Corona F, et al. Donating umbilical cord blood to a public bank or storing it in a private bank: knowledge and preference of blood donors and of pregnant women. Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue. 2012;10(3):331–7. Epub 2012/04/18. pmid:22507856; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3417732.
  19. 19. Al-Shammary AA, Hassan SUN. Medical Professionals’ Knowledge, Sensitivity, and Attitudes Towards Social and Ethical Aspects of Stem-Cell Donation, Therapy, and Research: Implications for Healthcare Risk Management. Risk management and healthcare policy. 2023;16:525–36. Epub 2023/04/08. pmid:37025465; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10072147.
  20. 20. Bhandari R, Lindley A, Bhatla D, Babic A, Mueckl K, Rao R, et al. Awareness of cord blood collection and the impact on banking. Pediatric blood & cancer. 2017;64(7). Epub 2017/01/24. pmid:28111924.
  21. 21. Fernandes Vasconcelos T, Gonçalves Menegueti M, Corsi CAC, Michelon-Barbosa J, Sato L, Basile-Filho A, et al. Assessment of physicians’ knowledge about brain death and organ donation and associated factors. Medicine. 2022;101(38):e30793. Epub 2022/10/06. pmid:36197182; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9509035.
  22. 22. Haddad MF, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH, Bakkar MM. Public attitudes toward corneal donation in northern Jordan. Clinical ophthalmology (Auckland, NZ). 2018;12:1973–80. Epub 2018/10/24. pmid:30349179; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6181474.
  23. 23. Al-Hindi AI, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH, Al-Sawalha NA. The attitude of blood donors towards the use of their samples and information in biomedical research. Journal of blood medicine. 2018;9:145–51. Epub 2018/10/06. pmid:30288135; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6162995.
  24. 24. Oliveira T, Costa I, Marinho V, Carvalho V, Uchôa K, Ayres C, et al. Human foreskin fibroblasts: From waste bag to important biomedical applications. Journal of Clinical Urology. 2018;11(6):385–94.
  25. 25. Becer E, Soykut G, Kabadayi H, Mammadov E, ÇaliŞ İ, Vatansever S. Obtaining Stem Cell Spheroids from Foreskin Tissue and the Effect of Corchorus olitorius L. on Spheroid Proliferation. Turkish journal of pharmaceutical sciences. 2020;17(3):265–70. Epub 2020/07/09. pmid:32636703; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7336037.
  26. 26. Mahallawi W, Almaramhy HH. A novel in vitro cell culture model of human foreskin to study the immunogenicity of live attenuated influenza vaccine. Majmaah Journal of Health Sciences. 2020;8(2):12-.
  27. 27. Basudan AM, Dagriri LK, Alnaqa GH, Alqahtani JM, Alsowail MI. Assessment of willingness of Saudi public to participate in a dental biorepository for research purposes. BMC oral health. 2023;23(1):80. Epub 2023/02/09. pmid:36750847; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9906834.
  28. 28. Pinto da Silva S, de Freitas C, Severo M, Silva S. Gamete and embryo donation for research: what might shape the willingness to donate among gamete donors and recipients? Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics. 2022;39(9):2077–87. Epub 2022/08/21. pmid:35986809; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9475016.
  29. 29. Huss MB, Schmitz-Valckenberg S, Finger RP, Löffler KU, Fleckenstein M, Holz FG, et al. The Willingness of Patients to Participate in an Eye Donation Registry for Research. Ophthalmologica Journal international d’ophtalmologie International journal of ophthalmology Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde. 2021;244(3):179–86. Epub 2020/12/15. pmid:33316801.
  30. 30. Raines-Milenkov A, Felini M, Baker E, Acharya R, Diese EL, Onsa S, et al. Willingness of a Multiethnic Immigrant Population to Donate Biospecimens for Research Purposes. Journal of immigrant and minority health. 2022;24(3):705–12. Epub 2021/07/28. pmid:34312776; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9072506.
  31. 31. Hazan A, Fitzsimmons B, Albert A, Renner R. A Canadian survey of patients’ attitudes toward donation of products of conception for research at the time of their aspiration abortion. Contraception. 2022;114:79–84. Epub 2022/06/19. pmid:35716804.
  32. 32. Nwogu JN, Babalola CP, Ngene SO, Taiwo BO, Berzins B, Gandhi M. Willingness to Donate Hair Samples for Research Among People Living with HIV/AIDS Attending a Tertiary Health Facility in Ibadan, Nigeria. AIDS research and human retroviruses. 2019;35(7):642–8. Epub 2019/05/03. pmid:31044607; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6602105.
  33. 33. Mortadi NA, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH. Considerations and beliefs in tooth donation to research in Jordan. Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dentistry. 2018;10:263–8. Epub 2018/12/12. pmid:30532599; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6241857.
  34. 34. Kettis-Lindblad A, Ring L, Viberth E, Hansson MG. Genetic research and donation of tissue samples to biobanks. What do potential sample donors in the Swedish general public think? European journal of public health. 2006;16(4):433–40. Epub 2005/10/07. pmid:16207726.
  35. 35. Majchrowska A, Wiechetek M, Domaradzki J, Pawlikowski J. Social differentiation of the perception and human tissues donation for research purposes. Frontiers in genetics. 2022;13:989252. Epub 2022/10/04. pmid:36186428; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9521191.
  36. 36. Domaradzki J, Pawlikowski J. Public Attitudes toward Biobanking of Human Biological Material for Research Purposes: A Literature Review. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2019;16(12). Epub 2019/06/27. pmid:31234457; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6617000.
  37. 37. Ahram M, Othman A, Shahrouri M, Mustafa E. Factors influencing public participation in biobanking. European journal of human genetics: EJHG. 2014;22(4):445–51. Epub 2013/08/08. pmid:23921537; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3953902.
  38. 38. Unger JM, Gralow JR, Albain KS, Ramsey SD, Hershman DL. Patient Income Level and Cancer Clinical Trial Participation: A Prospective Survey Study. JAMA oncology. 2016;2(1):137–9. Epub 2015/10/16. pmid:26468994; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4824189.
  39. 39. Alkaraki AK, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH, Al-Ebbini LMK, Altaany Z. Informed Consent Form Challenges for Genetic Research in Jordan. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare. 2020;13:235–9. Epub 2020/03/19. pmid:32184613; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7062388.
  40. 40. Habib T, Richa K, Abou-Mrad F. Challenges of the informed consent in some countries of the MENA region: A literature review. Ethics, Medicine and Public Health. 2021;19:100706.
  41. 41. Ibrahim MA, Alshogran OY, Khabour OF, Alzoubi KH. The quality of consent form structure in biomedical research: a study from Jordan and Sudan. Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare. 2019;12:727–31. Epub 2019/10/01. pmid:31564889; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6731522.
  42. 42. Ahram M, Abdelgawad F, ElHafeez SA, Abdelhafiz AS, Ibrahim ME, Elgamri A, et al. Perceptions, attitudes, and willingness of the public in low- and middle-income countries of the Arab region to participate in biobank research. BMC medical ethics. 2022;23(1):122. Epub 2022/12/03. pmid:36457067; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9713115.
  43. 43. Sinclair KA, Muller C, Noonan C, Booth-LaForce C, Buchwald DS. Increasing health equity through biospecimen research: Identification of factors that influence willingness of Native Americans to donate biospecimens. Preventive medicine reports. 2021;21:101311. Epub 2021/02/02. pmid:33520613; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC7820551.
  44. 44. Chan TW, Mackey S, Hegney DG. Patients’ experiences on donation of their residual biological samples and the impact of these experiences on the type of consent given for the future research use of the tissue: a systematic review. International journal of evidence-based healthcare. 2012;10(1):9–26. Epub 2012/03/13. pmid:22405414.
  45. 45. Hirst Y, Stoffel ST, Brewer HR, Timotijevic L, Raats MM, Flanagan JM. Understanding Public Attitudes and Willingness to Share Commercial Data for Health Research: Survey Study in the United Kingdom. JMIR public health and surveillance. 2023;9:e40814. Epub 2023/03/24. pmid:36951929; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10131900.
  46. 46. Brall C, Berlin C, Zwahlen M, Ormond KE, Egger M, Vayena E. Public willingness to participate in personalized health research and biobanking: A large-scale Swiss survey. PloS one. 2021;16(4):e0249141. Epub 2021/04/02. pmid:33793624; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC8016315.
  47. 47. Corsi CAC, Assunção-Luiz AV, Pitta NC, Cintra Á S, Scarpelini KCG, Bento RL, et al. Educational Actions to Raise Student Awareness About the Donation and Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues. Transplantation proceedings. 2023;55(6):1329–36. Epub 2023/05/16. pmid:37188609.