What Do We Mean by Sharing of Patient Data? DaSH - A Data Sharing Hierarchy of Privacy and Ethical Challenges.

IF 2.1 2区 医学 Q4 MEDICAL INFORMATICS
Richard Schreiber, Ross Koppel, Bonnie Kaplan
{"title":"What Do We Mean by Sharing of Patient Data? DaSH - A Data Sharing Hierarchy of Privacy and Ethical Challenges.","authors":"Richard Schreiber, Ross Koppel, Bonnie Kaplan","doi":"10.1055/a-2373-3291","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sharing of clinical data is common and necessary for patient care, research, public health, and innovation. The term \"data sharing,\" however, is often ambiguous in its many facets and complexities-each of which involves ethical, legal, and social issues. To our knowledge there is no extant hierarchy of data sharing that assesses these issues.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Develop a hierarchy explicating the risks and ethical complexities of data sharing with particular focus on patient data privacy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We surveyed the available peer-reviewed and gray literature, and with our combined extensive experience in bioethics and medical informatics, created this hierarchy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We present six ways data are shared and provide a tiered Data Sharing Hierarchy (DaSH) of risks, showing increasing threats to patients' privacy and to clinicians and organizations as one progresses up the hierarchy from data sharing for direct patient care, public health and safety, scientific research, commercial purposes, complex combinations of the preceding efforts, and among networked third parties. We offer recommendations to enhance benefits of data sharing while mitigating risks and protecting patients' interests by: improving consenting; developing better policies and procedures; clarifying, simplifying, and updating regulation to include all health-related data regardless of source; expanding the scope of bioethics for information technology; and increasing ongoing monitoring and research.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Data sharing, while essential for patient care, is increasingly complex, opaque, and perhaps perilous for patients, clinicians and healthcare institutions. Risks increase with advances in technology and with more encompassing patient data from wearables and artificial intelligence database mining.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>Data sharing places responsibilities on all parties: patients, clinicians, researchers, educators, risk managers, attorneys, informaticists, bioethicists, institutions, and policy makers.</p>","PeriodicalId":48956,"journal":{"name":"Applied Clinical Informatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Clinical Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2373-3291","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICAL INFORMATICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sharing of clinical data is common and necessary for patient care, research, public health, and innovation. The term "data sharing," however, is often ambiguous in its many facets and complexities-each of which involves ethical, legal, and social issues. To our knowledge there is no extant hierarchy of data sharing that assesses these issues.

Objective: Develop a hierarchy explicating the risks and ethical complexities of data sharing with particular focus on patient data privacy.

Methods: We surveyed the available peer-reviewed and gray literature, and with our combined extensive experience in bioethics and medical informatics, created this hierarchy.

Results: We present six ways data are shared and provide a tiered Data Sharing Hierarchy (DaSH) of risks, showing increasing threats to patients' privacy and to clinicians and organizations as one progresses up the hierarchy from data sharing for direct patient care, public health and safety, scientific research, commercial purposes, complex combinations of the preceding efforts, and among networked third parties. We offer recommendations to enhance benefits of data sharing while mitigating risks and protecting patients' interests by: improving consenting; developing better policies and procedures; clarifying, simplifying, and updating regulation to include all health-related data regardless of source; expanding the scope of bioethics for information technology; and increasing ongoing monitoring and research.

Conclusions: Data sharing, while essential for patient care, is increasingly complex, opaque, and perhaps perilous for patients, clinicians and healthcare institutions. Risks increase with advances in technology and with more encompassing patient data from wearables and artificial intelligence database mining.

Clinical significance: Data sharing places responsibilities on all parties: patients, clinicians, researchers, educators, risk managers, attorneys, informaticists, bioethicists, institutions, and policy makers.

共享患者数据是什么意思?DaSH - 隐私与伦理挑战的数据共享层次。
背景:共享临床数据是一种普遍现象,对于病人护理、研究、公共卫生和创新都是必要的。然而,"数据共享 "一词在其多面性和复杂性方面往往含糊不清,其中每个方面都涉及伦理、法律和社会问题。据我们所知,目前还没有一个评估这些问题的数据共享等级体系:制定一个层次结构,阐述数据共享的风险和伦理复杂性,尤其关注患者数据隐私:我们调查了现有的同行评议和灰色文献,并结合我们在生命伦理学和医学信息学方面的丰富经验,创建了这一层次结构:结果:我们介绍了数据共享的六种方式,并提供了数据共享风险分级体系(Data Sharing Hierarchy,DaSH),表明随着数据共享层次的上升,患者隐私以及临床医生和医疗机构所面临的威胁也在不断增加,包括为患者直接护理、公共健康和安全、科学研究、商业目的、前述工作的复杂组合以及联网第三方之间的数据共享。我们建议通过以下方式提高数据共享的效益,同时降低风险,保护患者的利益:改善同意程序;制定更好的政策和程序;澄清、简化和更新法规,将所有与健康相关的数据(无论其来源如何)纳入其中;扩大信息技术的生物伦理范围;加强持续监测和研究:结论:数据共享虽然对病人护理至关重要,但却越来越复杂、不透明,对病人、临床医生和医疗保健机构来说可能是危险的。随着技术的进步以及可穿戴设备和人工智能数据库挖掘出的更多患者数据,风险也在增加:数据共享要求各方承担责任:患者、临床医生、研究人员、教育工作者、风险管理者、律师、信息学家、生物伦理学家、机构和政策制定者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Clinical Informatics
Applied Clinical Informatics MEDICAL INFORMATICS-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
24.10%
发文量
132
期刊介绍: ACI is the third Schattauer journal dealing with biomedical and health informatics. It perfectly complements our other journals Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterMethods of Information in Medicine and the Öffnet internen Link im aktuellen FensterYearbook of Medical Informatics. The Yearbook of Medical Informatics being the “Milestone” or state-of-the-art journal and Methods of Information in Medicine being the “Science and Research” journal of IMIA, ACI intends to be the “Practical” journal of IMIA.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信