Visitors   Views   Downloads
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Table 1: Forms of consent described in literature

Terms used in literature are not always univocal and may also be used with different levels of specificity. In the table, the specific definitions described by the authors have been clustered into more general of consent described in accordance with this article. The more specific definitions are listed in the column “Definition”, the terms used to name them are outlined in “Type of consent” and “Disagreement”.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2091v2/supp-1

Figure 1: Reciprocity of findings

a breakdown of potential situations encountered when conducting genetic analysis on collected samples and practical examples of cases clearly belonging to each quarter.

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.2091v2/supp-2

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Tomas Klingström analyzed the data, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Erik Bongcam-Rudloff wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Jane Reichel analyzed the data, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The research in this article did not generate, collect or analyse any raw data or code.


The research leading to these results has received funding from the EU FP7 under grant nr. 313010 (BBMRI-LPC). The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community's Horizon 2020 programme under grant agreement n° 654404. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies