Cargando…

Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects

INTRODUCTION: Critical for advancing a Learning Health System (LHS) in the U.S., a regulatory safe harbor for deidentified data reduces barriers to learning from care at scale while minimizing privacy risks. We examine deidentified data policy as a mechanism for synthesizing the ethical obligations...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gross, Marielle S., Hood, Amelia J., Rubin, Joshua C., Miller, Robert C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9284924/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35860318
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10303
_version_ 1784747669904687104
author Gross, Marielle S.
Hood, Amelia J.
Rubin, Joshua C.
Miller, Robert C.
author_facet Gross, Marielle S.
Hood, Amelia J.
Rubin, Joshua C.
Miller, Robert C.
author_sort Gross, Marielle S.
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Critical for advancing a Learning Health System (LHS) in the U.S., a regulatory safe harbor for deidentified data reduces barriers to learning from care at scale while minimizing privacy risks. We examine deidentified data policy as a mechanism for synthesizing the ethical obligations underlying clinical care and human subjects research for an LHS which conceptually and practically integrates care and research, blurring the roles of patient and subject. METHODS: First, we discuss respect for persons vis‐a‐vis the systemic secondary use of data and tissue collected in the fiduciary context of clinical care. We argue that, without traditional informed consent or duty to benefit the individual, deidentification may allow secondary use to supersede the primary purpose of care. Next, we consider the effectiveness of deidentification for minimizing harms via privacy protection and maximizing benefits via promoting learning and translational care. We find that deidentification is unable to fully protect privacy given the vastness of health data and current technology, yet it imposes limitations to learning and barriers for efficient translation. After that, we evaluate the impact of deidentification on distributive justice within an LHS ethical framework in which patients are obligated to contribute to learning and the system has a duty to translate knowledge into better care. Such a system may permit exacerbation of health disparities as it accelerates learning without mechanisms to ensure that individuals' contributions and benefits are fair and balanced. RESULTS: We find that, despite its established advantages, system‐wide use of deidentification may be suboptimal for signaling respect, protecting privacy or promoting learning, and satisfying requirements of justice for patients and subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Finally, we highlight ethical, socioeconomic, technological and legal challenges and next steps, including a critical appreciation for novel approaches to realize an LHS that maximizes efficient, effective learning and just translation without the compromises of deidentification.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9284924
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92849242022-07-19 Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects Gross, Marielle S. Hood, Amelia J. Rubin, Joshua C. Miller, Robert C. Learn Health Syst Policy Analyses INTRODUCTION: Critical for advancing a Learning Health System (LHS) in the U.S., a regulatory safe harbor for deidentified data reduces barriers to learning from care at scale while minimizing privacy risks. We examine deidentified data policy as a mechanism for synthesizing the ethical obligations underlying clinical care and human subjects research for an LHS which conceptually and practically integrates care and research, blurring the roles of patient and subject. METHODS: First, we discuss respect for persons vis‐a‐vis the systemic secondary use of data and tissue collected in the fiduciary context of clinical care. We argue that, without traditional informed consent or duty to benefit the individual, deidentification may allow secondary use to supersede the primary purpose of care. Next, we consider the effectiveness of deidentification for minimizing harms via privacy protection and maximizing benefits via promoting learning and translational care. We find that deidentification is unable to fully protect privacy given the vastness of health data and current technology, yet it imposes limitations to learning and barriers for efficient translation. After that, we evaluate the impact of deidentification on distributive justice within an LHS ethical framework in which patients are obligated to contribute to learning and the system has a duty to translate knowledge into better care. Such a system may permit exacerbation of health disparities as it accelerates learning without mechanisms to ensure that individuals' contributions and benefits are fair and balanced. RESULTS: We find that, despite its established advantages, system‐wide use of deidentification may be suboptimal for signaling respect, protecting privacy or promoting learning, and satisfying requirements of justice for patients and subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Finally, we highlight ethical, socioeconomic, technological and legal challenges and next steps, including a critical appreciation for novel approaches to realize an LHS that maximizes efficient, effective learning and just translation without the compromises of deidentification. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC9284924/ /pubmed/35860318 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10303 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Learning Health Systems published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Michigan. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Policy Analyses
Gross, Marielle S.
Hood, Amelia J.
Rubin, Joshua C.
Miller, Robert C.
Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title_full Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title_fullStr Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title_full_unstemmed Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title_short Respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
title_sort respect, justice and learning are limited when patients are deidentified data subjects
topic Policy Analyses
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9284924/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35860318
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10303
work_keys_str_mv AT grossmarielles respectjusticeandlearningarelimitedwhenpatientsaredeidentifieddatasubjects
AT hoodameliaj respectjusticeandlearningarelimitedwhenpatientsaredeidentifieddatasubjects
AT rubinjoshuac respectjusticeandlearningarelimitedwhenpatientsaredeidentifieddatasubjects
AT millerrobertc respectjusticeandlearningarelimitedwhenpatientsaredeidentifieddatasubjects