Key Takeaways
- A survey of 1,607 Israeli adults found that 52% were willing to donate biological samples and associated information for medical research.
- Among those willing to donate, 84.6% were also prepared to link their samples to medical records, potentially helping scientists investigate diseases and treatment responses.
- Privacy concerns were a major obstacle, with 51% of a subgroup reluctant to donate or receive research findings expressing concerns about data protection.
- Independent American research found a similar pattern: 60% of respondents were willing to participate in biobanking despite widespread privacy concerns.
- Published in May 2026, the Israeli study was based on a survey conducted in early 2020 and measured stated willingness rather than actual donations.
Introduction
Blood samples and pathology slides in a medical laboratory. An Israeli survey found that 52% of respondents were willing to donate biological samples for medical research.
More than half of Israeli adults surveyed said they would be willing to donate biological samples for medical research, according to a study published in May 2026 in the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research.
The research involved 1,607 adults and examined attitudes toward contributing biological materials and health information to MIDGAM, Israel’s National Biobank for Research.
Of those surveyed, 836 people, or 52%, expressed willingness to donate samples. Most of these potential donors were also willing to allow researchers to link their samples with medical records.
Such contributions can help scientists investigate genetic differences, identify potential disease markers, and better understand why patients respond differently to treatments.
However, the study also identified concerns about privacy, data protection, and how donated materials would be used.
The findings offer insight into the public attitudes that could shape Israel’s biomedical research efforts. They also raise a question faced by biobanks worldwide: how can researchers obtain the biological information needed for scientific progress while protecting the people who provide it?
What the Israeli Study Examined
The research was conducted by Adelina Ovcharenko, Yehudit Cohen, and Shimon A. Reisner of MIDGAM, Israel National Biobank for Research (Ovcharenko et al., 2026).
MIDGAM was established in 2014 by Israel’s Ministry of Health to support biomedical research through the collection, storage, and controlled distribution of biological samples and associated clinical information.
Between January and March 2020, the researchers surveyed 1,607 Israeli adults aged 18 to 65 using an online questionnaire distributed by the research company Kantar.
The survey asked whether participants would donate biological samples, allow their samples to be linked with medical records, contribute repeatedly, and receive unexpected findings discovered during research.
Researchers also examined differences in willingness according to demographic and health characteristics.
The sample included Jewish and Arab respondents from different religious and socioeconomic backgrounds. Demographic quotas and statistical weighting were used to approximate the composition of Israel’s adult population.
Because the research was cross-sectional, it measured attitudes at one point in time. It did not follow participants to determine whether they subsequently donated biological materials.
What Researchers Found
More Than Half Supported Biological Sample Donation
The central finding was that 836 of the 1,607 respondents, representing 52%, said they would donate biological samples and associated information for medical research.
Biological samples can include blood, tissue, saliva, urine, and other bodily materials.
Scientists use these resources to investigate genetic characteristics, biological processes involved in disease, and potential markers associated with treatment responses.
Although the survey indicates considerable willingness to participate, it does not establish that 52% of Israeli adults would actually donate when approached.
Most Potential Donors Also Accepted Medical-Record Linkage
Among the 836 respondents willing to donate, 707, or 84.6%, were also willing to connect their samples with medical records.
That represents approximately 44% of the entire survey sample.
This is important because linking biological samples to clinical information can make research more informative.
For example, scientists examining cancer samples may investigate whether particular molecular characteristics are associated with differences in disease progression or treatment response.
Similar approaches can be used to study cardiovascular disease, inherited disorders, and other conditions.
However, identifying an association between a biological marker and a health outcome does not establish that the marker causes the outcome or can reliably guide treatment.
Such discoveries require additional validation before they can influence medical practice.
Many Respondents Were Willing to Donate Repeatedly
The researchers also investigated interest in ongoing participation.
Among the 707 respondents willing to donate samples linked to medical records, 659, or 93.2%, said they would consider donating at least once a year.
Of these, 370 were willing to donate whenever needed, potentially more than once annually, while 289 preferred annual donations.
Repeated sampling can be useful for studies examining biological changes over time.
Researchers may, for example, compare samples collected at different stages of an illness to investigate how disease-related markers evolve.
Some Participants Wanted Their Research Results Returned
The study also examined attitudes toward incidental findings, which are discoveries made during research that were not part of its original purpose.
A total of 643 respondents, approximately 40% of the full survey sample, expressed willingness to donate biological samples and an interest in receiving incidental research findings.
Among these respondents, preferences differed regarding the types of findings they wanted researchers to communicate. The survey measured stated preferences rather than whether participants would ultimately receive such information in practice.
Among the 643 respondents interested in incidental findings, 530 wanted to receive all such findings, while 113 preferred information with potential therapeutic relevance.
This introduces an important ethical challenge.
Some genetic findings may identify medically relevant risks, but others have uncertain significance. Returning information without adequate interpretation could create confusion or unnecessary anxiety.
Biobanks therefore need policies specifying which findings should be communicated, how they should be verified, and whether participants should receive genetic counseling or other professional support.
Privacy Concerns Were a Major Barrier
Despite substantial willingness to participate, the Israeli researchers identified significant reservations.
The researchers also examined reasons for reluctance among 950 respondents who were unwilling to donate biological samples or did not wish to receive research findings. Within this group, 51% reported concerns about privacy and data protection. This percentage should not be interpreted as the proportion of all survey participants who opposed donating biological samples because of privacy concerns.
Another 35% reported insufficient understanding of the purpose of donation.
These concerns are particularly important in genetic research because biological samples can contain sensitive information about inherited characteristics and potential health risks.
According to the paper, MIDGAM provides approved researchers with coded biological samples, while access to identifiable medical information is restricted to authorized personnel.
The system operates under oversight from Israel’s Ministry of Health.
However, privacy protections do not automatically eliminate public concerns.
Potential participants may want to know who can access their information, whether samples could be used in commercial research, and how their data will be protected over time.
The Israeli researchers also found that 91% of respondents in a group reluctant to participate indicated that explanations from treating physicians would not persuade them to change their views.
This suggests that providing information alone may not be enough to address established concerns.
How the Findings Compare With Independent Research
The Israeli findings are supported by earlier research showing that public interest in biobanking often coexists with substantial concerns about privacy.
In a national survey of 4,659 American adults, researchers found that 60% would participate in a proposed biobank if invited (Kaufman et al., 2009).
That proportion was somewhat higher than the 52% reported in Israel, although differences in survey design, population, and participation scenarios prevent a straightforward comparison.
The American study also found that approximately 90% of respondents were concerned about protecting their privacy in the proposed research.
Furthermore, 56% were concerned about researchers possessing their biological samples and information, while 37% feared that collected data could be used against them.
Despite these reservations, many participants remained willing to contribute.
The American findings reinforce the observation that privacy concerns and willingness to participate in biobanking can coexist. However, the relationship was influenced by the participation conditions described to respondents.
In particular, the researchers found that the association between privacy concerns and lower willingness depended partly on financial compensation and whether individual research results would be returned.
These findings suggest that decisions about biobank participation involve several considerations beyond privacy alone.
The American Research Also Revealed Important Differences
Kaufman and colleagues found that respondents’ willingness to share information depended partly on who would use it.
Approximately 92% were willing to allow academic or medical researchers to access their samples and information, compared with 80% for government researchers and 75% for pharmaceutical-company researchers.
This distinction complicates the interpretation of broad public support for biobanking.
Someone who agrees to donate to a national research institution may not necessarily support every possible use of their biological material.
The American survey also found differences in consent preferences. Approximately 48% preferred granting permission once for research approved by an oversight panel, while 42% wanted to be asked for permission for each individual project.
These results indicate that trust and personal control are important considerations alongside the scientific value of donation.
For Israel’s national biobank, the comparison reinforces the importance of explaining not only why samples are collected but also how they may be used and shared.
Willingness Varied Across Israeli Communities
The Israeli study also found differences between population groups.
Approximately 56.4% of non-ultra-Orthodox Jewish respondents were willing to donate biological samples, compared with 41.3% of Arab respondents and 40% of ultra-Orthodox Jewish respondents.
Willingness to donate also differed according to education, household income, and reported health characteristics. Respondents with post-secondary education or above-average income showed greater willingness to participate.
The study also identified associations involving physical activity, chronic illness, previous hospitalization, and other health-related characteristics.
These findings were based on comparisons between survey groups and do not establish that any individual characteristic directly caused greater or lower willingness.
Other influences, including familiarity with research, institutional trust, and healthcare experiences, may contribute to these differences. The results should therefore be interpreted as observed associations rather than proof of independent causal effects.
The results nevertheless raise an important issue for the development of representative research collections.
If some communities are underrepresented in biobanks, scientific findings derived from those collections may be less applicable to those populations.
For a country with Israel’s demographic diversity, broad participation could help researchers investigate health conditions across different communities.
Achieving that participation, however, requires consent practices that respect individual choices and address the concerns of different groups.
What the Findings May Mean for Medical Research
Biobanks provide infrastructure that can support studies into the biological mechanisms of disease.
When researchers can analyze samples alongside clinical records, they may identify patterns that would be difficult to detect using biological materials alone.
These investigations can contribute to the early stages of developing diagnostic tools, identifying potential drug targets, and studying differences in treatment response.
Israel’s MIDGAM initiative provides an organized framework for collecting and managing such materials through participating medical centers.
The survey offers information that could help the institution plan public engagement, improve consent procedures, and identify barriers to participation.
However, the research should not be interpreted as evidence that greater donation rates will necessarily produce better treatments or improved patient outcomes.
The path from biological discovery to clinical benefit involves further laboratory investigation, validation studies, clinical trials when appropriate, and regulatory review.
The Israeli study addresses an earlier part of that process: whether people are willing to provide the materials and information on which some forms of biomedical research depend.
Limitations
Several factors limit how broadly the findings can be interpreted.
First, although the study was published in May 2026, the survey was conducted between January and March 2020. Public attitudes toward medical research, genetic information, and data privacy may have changed since then.
Second, participants were recruited through an online survey panel. This approach may have underrepresented people with limited internet access or lower digital literacy. Individuals who agreed to participate in the survey may also have differed from those who declined.
Third, respondents described their willingness to donate biological samples under hypothetical circumstances. The study did not observe actual donations or determine whether participants would maintain their stated preferences over time.
Fourth, the survey included adults aged 18 to 65. Its findings cannot automatically be generalized to older adults or to the entire Israeli population.
Fifth, self-reported answers may have been influenced by social expectations, and the online format offered limited opportunities to clarify questions that participants found confusing.
Finally, the cross-sectional design and statistical comparisons cannot establish why demographic or health-related differences in willingness occurred. The study also did not test whether particular privacy protections, consent procedures, or communication strategies would increase actual donation rates.
These limitations mean that the findings are best understood as a snapshot of reported attitudes among surveyed adults, rather than a prediction of future biobank participation.
Final Thoughts
A survey of 1,607 Israeli adults found that 52% were willing to donate biological samples for medical research, with many also expressing interest in linking their samples to medical records and receiving research findings.
The results point to both the potential for public participation in biobanking and the importance of addressing privacy concerns, explaining how samples will be used, and respecting individual consent preferences.
Although the survey cannot predict actual donation rates, it provides information that may help Israel’s national biobank develop more transparent and inclusive approaches to public engagement.
Successful biobanking depends not only on collecting biological materials but also on maintaining the trust of the people who provide them.
Funding and Disclosures
The Israeli study was funded by Israel’s Ministry of Health through grant MOHIG 021-2019 511069419.
All three authors were affiliated with MIDGAM, Israel National Biobank for Research.
The authors declared no competing interests.
The study received approval from the Israeli Ministry of Health’s Supreme Independent Review Board (MID-111-2019).
The independent American study by Kaufman and colleagues was supported by the National Human Genome Research Institute. Its authors reported no conflicts of interest.
References
Kaufman, D. J., Murphy-Bollinger, J., Scott, J., & Hudson, K. L. (2009). Public opinion about the importance of privacy in biobank research. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 85(5), 643–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.10.002
Ovcharenko, A., Cohen, Y., & Reisner, S. A. (2026). Willingness to donate biosamples to a national biobank in Israel: A population-based cross-sectional survey. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research, 15, Article 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13584-026-00762-3