A Few Notes on the Importance of Public Feedback

June is often a time of year when thoughts turn to celebrations like Father’s Day and graduations.  However, at NIH, when we think of June, we are gearing up for the bi-annual meeting of the Advisory Committee to the NIH Director (ACD).  While prepping for this meeting definitely takes some work, the real fun begins at the meeting when the discussion energizes new strategic initiatives or drives solutions for some of the most pressing issues facing NIH. 

For those of you who tuned in to last week’s meeting of the ACD, you probably heard that NIH has an ambitious policy agenda.  These presentations included a briefing on NIH’s progress regarding public access, a review of recent requests we have received from researchers to access the whole HeLa genome sequence from dbGaP, updates from my co-chair on the Clinical Trial Stewardship Task Force, Dr. Debara Tucci, and a status update from one of our newest ACD working group (WG) looking at the issue of Novel Alternative Methods (NAMs). 

The big news with respect to NAMs is that we have published a request for information (RFI) to help inform the ACD WG’s deliberations. If you missed the conversation, the ACD WG is working to identify areas in which the development and use of NAMs provide the most value to biomedical research. In particularly, we are interested in learning from the research community how NAMs are currently being used to study human biology, circuits, systems, and disease states; approaches for catalyzing the development and validation of new NAMs; and strategies for maximizing the value of NAMs in research.  We are accepting comments until September 5 and full information on how to comment can be found at: https://osp.od.nih.gov/request-for-information-rfi-catalyzing-the-development-and-use-of-novel-alternative-methods-to-advance-biomedical-research/.  Also, make sure to be on the lookout for more information about a workshop we will be holding on NAMs later this summer.

At this point, you may be wondering what impact commenting on our RFIs has on the policy development process.  To be perfectly frank, RFI feedback is an essential component of policymaking and responding to RFIs is one of the most important ways to directly shape NIH policy.  When we release an RFI we are not only telegraphing our current thinking on future policy directions, but also road-testing policy provisions so you can tell us what we got right and – perhaps most importantly – what we didn’t think about. By providing your thoughts and insights you can unambiguously tell us whether we are on the right track or whether you think we have missed the mark and need to go back to the drawing board.  As a matter of policy, OSP posts all the comments it receives on our RFIs on the OSP website.  Posting these comments reflects our commitment to stakeholders that we consider every comment we receive.  In addition, by proactively posting these comments, stakeholders can easily and transparently follow the entire policy development process.

So, what is helpful to include in public comments? First, when providing feedback, it is important to be as specific as possible.  This level of specificity is essential to help us understand your thinking. Anyone who has an Amazon account knows that the tendency is to respond only when your shipment was late, but we need to know both what works and what doesn’t.  It can also be helpful to describe what types of information might be helpful to make implementation more seamless. Take for instance the NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy. As a result of public comments, we developed multiple supplemental information materials due to community requests.

In summary, we ARE listening, and we DO want to hear from you. Public feedback on our proposals is essential, and we want to ensure that we maximize the opportunities for our stakeholders to tell us their thoughts.  With that said, I look forward to seeing not only your thoughts on our NAMs proposal, but on all our future proposals as well. 

Note this post was updated to reflect a new closing date of September 5, 2023 (Original Date: August 16, 2023)

Lyric Jorgenson, PhD
NIH Associate Director for Science Policy
About Lyric

A Fun Way to Learn More About OSP

NOTE: This puzzle uses HTML embedding. If the interactive features at first do not work, you may need to refresh the page or clear your cache (CTRL+SHIFT+R)



Lyric Jorgenson, PhD
NIH Associate Director for Science Policy
About Lyric

Harnessing the Power of Our Digital Future

I don’t think it would be news to anyone reading this blog to hear we are living in a digital economy. Whether at home, work, or play, the data we provide about ourselves are being collected and used to understand our preferences and shape our behaviors. A lot of the time, we freely give away this information so that we can get access to the latest app or service aimed at making life easier. For example, providing information on your location so that a charming British voice can provide you with step-by-step directions to brunch on your GPS can be a real timesaver. However, how does your calculus change when you are asked to provide data related to your health and well-being? Would you think differently about giving access to your personal health data so readily? How would you consider your family’s privacy or the potential benefit to public health?

As the leading biomedical research agency for the Nation, how people think about sharing their personal health data is key to informing policy development. It is clear that health-related apps, wearable devices, social media, and other personalized technologies can move a research study from the lab to the real world. But how this transformation takes place, especially in terms of how NIH can ensure responsible data collection, analysis, and use, requires careful consideration.

To assist NIH in thinking through these issues, NIH charged a working group of the Novel and Exceptional Technology and Research Advisory Committee (NExTRAC) to forecast areas of research in which emerging technologies might yield novel data types and sources.

The first step in tackling this problem is to identify potential studies and why they might be undertaken.  This is a vital step as any future policy must clearly balance the benefits and risks for individuals and the public. The working group has been hard at work over the last several months meeting with a variety of experts across sectors to develop a draft list of types of research questions. These questions were presented and discussed during the working group’s progress update at the meeting of the NExTRAC on July 14, 2022.

In general, key aspects of the discussion focused on:

  • Emerging Data Sources: Personal health data collected from outside of the traditional healthcare system are increasingly being used to study health-related questions and predict health risks. Collection and sharing of these data has enormous potential to help people, but how these research aims affect not only individuals, but also families and communities (who might share genetic makeup or walk around the same rooms) and how we effectively communicate the broader risks and benefits require careful consideration.
  • Use of Models and Algorithms: Computer-based technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and automated image analysis, have the potential to revolutionize diagnostic and treatment decisions. Knowing that the accuracy of these technologies depends on the data that were used in their development, how do we responsibly deploy for early adoption or underserved populations who may not be represented in those underlying data? Lack of representation in datasets remains a pervasive challenge, which can be detrimental when used to inform healthcare decisions. These biases can be further exacerbated when datasets are combined as the biases existing in one dataset can be reflected in all the others.
  • Linkage and Aggregation: Researchers have an increasing capability to link diverse datasets, such as electronic health records with genomic information, creating new opportunities and challenges. Can dataset formats be standardized so that data from different countries and healthcare systems could be aggregated, linked, and shared across populations? How can personal health libraries be used to combine individuals’ health information across multiple different data streams to inform health outcomes?

Importantly, much of the discussion emphasized the point that how we think about these technologies – and the opportunities and challenges they raise – is highly personal and context matters. This is why we need robust and representative input. Particular attention should be placed on those not traditionally engaged in the conversation, including people who may be more skeptical of sharing data for research. Accordingly, the working group discussed its plans to engage the public in the conversation to understand more about how to balance the benefits and risks in these types of research. These engagements represent a critical step in the process to ensure that participants remain partners at the center of our research efforts.

While this will not be an easy task, I’m very excited about the NExTRAC’s next steps as they will not only help us think through policy issues on the horizon, but also help chart the course for new ways of engaging the public in the policy process. In case you were unable to attend the meeting (archived here), expect to see some announcements for the working group’s engagement activities in the near future and their final recommendations to NIH some time in 2023. Emerging technology in data science continues to shape the way we conduct research, and we look forward to working with the public we serve to ensure that we balance this change for the greatest good.

Lyric Jorgenson, PhD
NIH Associate Director for Science Policy
About Lyric

DataWorks! Prize – Incentives for building a culture of data sharing and reuse

This is a guest blog from Susan K. Gregurick, Ph.D. Dr. Gregurick is the Associate Director for Data Science and Director of the Office of Data Science Strategy (ODSS).  More information about ODSS can be found at: https://datascience.nih.gov/

A $500,000 prize purse, rewarding data sharing and reuse in biomedical research, is a new, innovative strategy for supporting the research community. The DataWorks! Prize highlights the role of data sharing and reuse in scientific discovery while recognizing and rewarding researchers who engage in these practices. This prize, which launched on May 11, 2022, is a partnership between the NIH Office of Data Science Strategy and the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB).

The future of biological and biomedical research hinges on researchers’ ability to share and reuse data. Sharing and reuse had a sizable, catalytic impact on the development of COVID-19 vaccines and treatment protocols. The DataWorks! Prize is an opportunity for the research community to share their stories about the practices, big and small, that lead to scientific discovery.

To participate, research teams share their stories through a simple two-stage application. Through narrative prompts, teams share details of the practices they used, the scientific impact of their achievements, and the potential for replicating their practices for further scientific research. This year, the DataWorks! Prize purse is up to $500,000 across 12 monetary awards including two $100,000 grand prize awards.

Beyond monetary awards, the DataWorks! Prize is an opportunity for the research community to learn from peers and apply those lessons to their research practices. The innovative approaches and tools from prize winners will be highlighted in a symposium 2023 and made available to support community learning.

As implementation of the NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy draws near, consider the broader intent of this policy: building a culture of data sharing and reuse in the biomedical research community. Incentives are a major part of culture change and we are excited to provide a space for the community to share their achievements and learn together. Through initiatives like the prize and the launch of the new sharing.nih.gov website, we are taking new steps to support the future of biological and biomedical research at the center of the NIH’s Data Management and Sharing Policy.

The DataWorks! Prize is currently open for submissions. Participants must register to participate by June 28, 2022 – visit Challenge.gov for more information and to apply.

Lyric Jorgenson, PhD
NIH Associate Director for Science Policy
About Lyric