Qualitative Interviews From the Biomodifying Technologies Project, 2017-2020

Morrison, Michael and Bartlett, Andrew and Faulkner, Alex and Li, Phoebe (2022). Qualitative Interviews From the Biomodifying Technologies Project, 2017-2020. [Data Collection]. Colchester, Essex: UK Data Service. 10.5255/UKDA-SN-855143

Data description (abstract)

This data set comprises de-identified transcripts of semi structured qualitative interviews conducted as part of the ESRC funded project “Biomodifying technologies and experimental space: organisational and regulatory implications for the translation and valuation of health research”. The project was led by researchers based in the Centre for Health, Law and Emerging Technologies at the University of Oxford in partnership with colleagues at the Universities of Sussex and York.
Biomodifying technologies are those which modify living biological tissue in novel and increasingly patient-orientated and customised ways. The case study biomodifying technologies in this project were: ‘gene-editing’ whose goal is to understand and remove disease-related mutations, the creation of induced pluripotent stem cells that can be controlled to create different types of tissue for cell therapy, and the emergence of 3D printing of biological material which aims to create novel structures for bodily repair and renewal.
The project addressed the following research questions: 1) How can the experimental space which these technologies currently occupy be characterised? What impact will this have on translational health research and its likely trajectories? 2) What are the challenges and risks posed by these technologies for existing, legal, regulatory and governance regimes? How are development strategies being shaped by these regimes? 3) What is defined as the benefit or value of these technologies? Which groups benefit or are seen to benefit, and how is benefit and value assessed? How does consensus about their value build?
The project team utilised a mixed methods approach for UK fieldwork combining documentary analysis of various literatures, including the academic and grey literatures, with qualitative semi-structured interviews with a range of key stakeholders in each of the fields being studied. These include scientists working in academic laboratories, representatives of SMEs, research agencies, regulators, and senior staff in important service organisations.

Data creators:

Creator Name	Affiliation	ORCID (as URL)
Morrison Michael	University of Oxford	ttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-6870-6673
Bartlett Andrew	University of York	https://orcid.org/ 0000-0002-6927-0899
Faulkner Alex	University of Sussex	https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0492-6316
Li Phoebe	University of Sussex	https://orcid.org/ 0000-0001-9171-1729

Contributors:

Name	Affiliation	ORCID (as URL)
Bartlett Andrew	University of York	https://orcid.org/ 0000-0002-6927-0899
Faulkner Alex	University of Sussex
Webster Andrew	University of York
Kaye Jane	University of Oxford
Li Phoebe	University of Sussex

Sponsors:

Economic and Social Research Council

Grant reference:

ES/P002943/1

Topic classification:

Science and technology
Health

Keywords:

SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION, HEALTH-RELATED BIOTECHNOLOGY, REGENERATIVE MEDICINE, VALUES, COMMERCIAL INNOVATION, STEM CELL RESEARCH, GENE THERAPY, SOCIOLOGY

Date published:

30 Jun 2022 15:01

Last modified:

30 Jun 2022 15:01

Coverage and Methodology

Access and Administration

Data sourcing, processing and preparation:

Individuals interviewed signed a physical or digital consent form indicating their consent to i) give a voluntary qualitative semi-structured interview, ii) have an audio recording made of the interview. The consent form indicates discrete consent that the interviewee consents to and agrees that i) their participation is voluntary, ii) they understand who will have access to personal data provided, how the data will be stored and what will happen to the data at the end of the project. iii) that research data collected during the study may be looked at by designated individuals from the University of Oxford where it is relevant to my taking part in this study, iv) they understand how this research will be written up and published. Interviewees were also asked to indicate that they understood that the empirical research component of the project had been reviewed by, and received ethics clearance through, the University of Oxford Central University Research Ethics Committee and that they understand how to raise a concern or make a complaint about this study if they so chose. Lastly interviewees were asked to indicate their consent to an edited transcript of this interview with identifying details removed can be submitted to the UK Research Data Service. However if interviewees were happy to give the interview (i.e. if they signed gave written consent to all the above items) but did *not* consent to the deposit of a transcript with the RDA, then the interview would proceed with the understanding that no transcript would be deposited. Interview transcripts were manually de-identified by close reading and redaction of identifying details such as names of persons, institutions, companies, events, and specific dates, publications, patents or other materials that could identify the interviewee directly or indirectly by identifying known associates or employers. Audio recordings of the interviews cannot be de-identified and are not included in this data set.

Rights owners: