Access to General Practice Data for Research in Australia: The Need for Greater Clarity in Relation to Privacy and Confidentiality.

IF 0.6 Q2 LAW
Journal of Law and Medicine Pub Date : 2025-04-01
Carolyn Adams, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Felicity Flack
{"title":"Access to General Practice Data for Research in Australia: The Need for Greater Clarity in Relation to Privacy and Confidentiality.","authors":"Carolyn Adams, Annette Braunack-Mayer, Felicity Flack","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the demand for access to general practice data for research in Australia is strong, the current legal and policy framework regulating this activity does not provide clear guidance for stakeholders. The use of general practice data is regulated by two bodies of law: the equitable duty of confidence and data protection legislation. General practitioners must comply with both bodies of law in using or disclosing general practice data for research. The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act) recognises and supports the use of personal health information for research, including without consent in specific circumstances where it is impracticable to obtain consent. The equitable duty of confidence only allows the use of health information for research with express, voluntary, and informed consent. This distinction has the potential to place general practitioners who release information for research under the Privacy Act in breach of their duty of confidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":45522,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Law and Medicine","volume":"31 4","pages":"840-855"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Law and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While the demand for access to general practice data for research in Australia is strong, the current legal and policy framework regulating this activity does not provide clear guidance for stakeholders. The use of general practice data is regulated by two bodies of law: the equitable duty of confidence and data protection legislation. General practitioners must comply with both bodies of law in using or disclosing general practice data for research. The Privacy Act 1988 (Cth) (Privacy Act) recognises and supports the use of personal health information for research, including without consent in specific circumstances where it is impracticable to obtain consent. The equitable duty of confidence only allows the use of health information for research with express, voluntary, and informed consent. This distinction has the potential to place general practitioners who release information for research under the Privacy Act in breach of their duty of confidence.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
63
×
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