Conceptualizing fairness in the secondary use of health data for research: A scoping review.

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS
Patricia Cervera de la Cruz, Mahsa Shabani
{"title":"Conceptualizing fairness in the secondary use of health data for research: A scoping review.","authors":"Patricia Cervera de la Cruz, Mahsa Shabani","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2271394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>With the introduction of the European Health Data Space (EHDS), the secondary use of health data for research purposes is attracting more attention. Secondary health data processing promises to address novel research questions, inform the design of future research and improve healthcare delivery generally. To comply with the existing data protection regulations, the secondary data use must be fair, among other things. However, there is no clear understanding of what fairness means in the context of secondary use of health data for scientific research purposes. In response, we conducted a scoping review of argument-based literature to explore how fairness in the secondary use of health data has been conceptualized. A total of 35 publications were included in the final synthesis after abstract and full-text screening. Using an inductive approach and a thematic analysis, our review has revealed that balancing individual and public interests, reducing power asymmetries, setting conditions for commercial involvement, and implementing benefit sharing are essential to guarantee fair secondary use research. The findings of this review can inform current and future research practices and policy development to adequately address concerns about fairness in the secondary use of health data.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"233-262"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2023.2271394","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With the introduction of the European Health Data Space (EHDS), the secondary use of health data for research purposes is attracting more attention. Secondary health data processing promises to address novel research questions, inform the design of future research and improve healthcare delivery generally. To comply with the existing data protection regulations, the secondary data use must be fair, among other things. However, there is no clear understanding of what fairness means in the context of secondary use of health data for scientific research purposes. In response, we conducted a scoping review of argument-based literature to explore how fairness in the secondary use of health data has been conceptualized. A total of 35 publications were included in the final synthesis after abstract and full-text screening. Using an inductive approach and a thematic analysis, our review has revealed that balancing individual and public interests, reducing power asymmetries, setting conditions for commercial involvement, and implementing benefit sharing are essential to guarantee fair secondary use research. The findings of this review can inform current and future research practices and policy development to adequately address concerns about fairness in the secondary use of health data.

二次使用健康数据进行研究的公平性概念化:范围界定综述。
随着欧洲健康数据空间(EHDS)的引入,将健康数据二次用于研究目的越来越受到关注。二次健康数据处理有望解决新的研究问题,为未来研究的设计提供信息,并普遍改善医疗服务。为了遵守现有的数据保护法规,二次数据的使用必须公平等。然而,对于出于科学研究目的二次使用健康数据的情况下,公平意味着什么,还没有明确的理解。作为回应,我们对基于论点的文献进行了范围界定审查,以探讨健康数据二次使用的公平性是如何概念化的。经过摘要和全文筛选,共有35篇出版物被纳入最终综合。通过归纳法和专题分析,我们的综述表明,平衡个人和公共利益、减少权力不对称、为商业参与创造条件以及实施利益共享对于保证公平的二次使用研究至关重要。这项审查的结果可以为当前和未来的研究实践和政策制定提供信息,以充分解决对健康数据二次使用公平性的担忧。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
×
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