Cargando…
A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent
BACKGROUND: We aimed to synthesise data on issues related to stakeholder perceptions of consent for the use of secondary data. To better understand the current literature available, we conducted a systematic literature review of healthcare consumer attitudes towards the secondary use and sharing of...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8094598/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33941282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01663-z |
_version_ | 1783687999011160064 |
---|---|
author | Hutchings, Elizabeth Loomes, Max Butow, Phyllis Boyle, Frances M. |
author_facet | Hutchings, Elizabeth Loomes, Max Butow, Phyllis Boyle, Frances M. |
author_sort | Hutchings, Elizabeth |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: We aimed to synthesise data on issues related to stakeholder perceptions of consent for the use of secondary data. To better understand the current literature available, we conducted a systematic literature review of healthcare consumer attitudes towards the secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data. METHODS: EMBASE/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Informit Health Collection, PROSPERO Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO and ProQuest databases were searched. Eligible articles included those reporting qualitative or quantitative original research and published in English. No restrictions were placed on publication dates, study design or disease setting. One author screened articles for eligibility and two authors were involved in the full-text review process. Conflicts were resolved by consensus. Quality and bias were assessed using the QualSyst criteria for qualitative studies. RESULTS: This paper focuses on a subset of 47 articles identified from the wider search and focuses on the issue of consent. Issues related to privacy, trust and transparency, and attitudes of healthcare professionals and researchers to secondary use and sharing of data have been dealt with in previous publications. Studies included a total of 216,149 respondents. Results indicate that respondents are generally supportive of using health data for research, particularly if the data is de-identified or anonymised. The requirement by participants to obtain consent prior to the use of health data for research was not universal, nor is the requirement for this always supported by legislation. Many respondents believed that either no consent or being informed of the research, but not providing additional consent, were sufficient. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that individuals should be provided with information and choice about how their health data is used and, where feasible, a mechanism to opt-out should be provided. To increase the acceptability of using health data for research, health organisations and data custodians must provide individuals with concise information about data protection mechanisms and under what circumstances their data may be used and by whom. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018110559 (update June 2020). |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8094598 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80945982021-05-05 A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent Hutchings, Elizabeth Loomes, Max Butow, Phyllis Boyle, Frances M. Syst Rev Research BACKGROUND: We aimed to synthesise data on issues related to stakeholder perceptions of consent for the use of secondary data. To better understand the current literature available, we conducted a systematic literature review of healthcare consumer attitudes towards the secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data. METHODS: EMBASE/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PubMed, CINAHL, Informit Health Collection, PROSPERO Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO and ProQuest databases were searched. Eligible articles included those reporting qualitative or quantitative original research and published in English. No restrictions were placed on publication dates, study design or disease setting. One author screened articles for eligibility and two authors were involved in the full-text review process. Conflicts were resolved by consensus. Quality and bias were assessed using the QualSyst criteria for qualitative studies. RESULTS: This paper focuses on a subset of 47 articles identified from the wider search and focuses on the issue of consent. Issues related to privacy, trust and transparency, and attitudes of healthcare professionals and researchers to secondary use and sharing of data have been dealt with in previous publications. Studies included a total of 216,149 respondents. Results indicate that respondents are generally supportive of using health data for research, particularly if the data is de-identified or anonymised. The requirement by participants to obtain consent prior to the use of health data for research was not universal, nor is the requirement for this always supported by legislation. Many respondents believed that either no consent or being informed of the research, but not providing additional consent, were sufficient. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that individuals should be provided with information and choice about how their health data is used and, where feasible, a mechanism to opt-out should be provided. To increase the acceptability of using health data for research, health organisations and data custodians must provide individuals with concise information about data protection mechanisms and under what circumstances their data may be used and by whom. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018110559 (update June 2020). BioMed Central 2021-05-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8094598/ /pubmed/33941282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01663-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Hutchings, Elizabeth Loomes, Max Butow, Phyllis Boyle, Frances M. A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title | A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title_full | A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title_fullStr | A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title_short | A systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
title_sort | systematic literature review of attitudes towards secondary use and sharing of health administrative and clinical trial data: a focus on consent |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8094598/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33941282 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01663-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hutchingselizabeth asystematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT loomesmax asystematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT butowphyllis asystematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT boylefrancesm asystematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT hutchingselizabeth systematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT loomesmax systematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT butowphyllis systematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent AT boylefrancesm systematicliteraturereviewofattitudestowardssecondaryuseandsharingofhealthadministrativeandclinicaltrialdataafocusonconsent |