• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

健康信息:平衡个人隐私与人类健康的公共利益。

Health information: reconciling personal privacy with the public good of human health.

作者信息

Gostin L O

机构信息

Georgetown University, 600 New Jersey Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20001, USA.

出版信息

Health Care Anal. 2001;9(3):321-35. doi: 10.1023/A:1012905932744.

DOI:10.1023/A:1012905932744
PMID:11794835
Abstract

The success of the health care system depends on the accuracy, correctness and trustworthiness of the information, and the privacy rights of individuals to control the disclosure of personal information. A national policy on health informational privacy should be guided by ethical principles that respect individual autonomy while recognizing the important collective interests in the use of health information. At present there are no adequate laws or constitutional principles to help guide a rational privacy policy. The laws are scattered and fragmented across the states. Constitutional law is highly general, without important specific safeguards. Finally, a case study is provided showing the important trade-offs that exist between public health and privacy. For a model public health law, see www.critpath.org/msphpa/privacy.

摘要

医疗保健系统的成功取决于信息的准确性、正确性和可信度,以及个人控制个人信息披露的隐私权。关于健康信息隐私的国家政策应以道德原则为指导,这些原则既要尊重个人自主权,又要认识到在使用健康信息方面重要的集体利益。目前,没有足够的法律或宪法原则来指导合理的隐私政策。法律在各州之间分散且零碎。宪法非常笼统,没有重要的具体保障措施。最后,提供了一个案例研究,展示了公共卫生与隐私之间存在的重要权衡。有关示范公共卫生法,请访问www.critpath.org/msphpa/privacy。

相似文献

1
Health information: reconciling personal privacy with the public good of human health.健康信息:平衡个人隐私与人类健康的公共利益。
Health Care Anal. 2001;9(3):321-35. doi: 10.1023/A:1012905932744.
2
Practice brief. Notice of information practices.实践简报。信息实践通知。
J AHIMA. 2001 May;72(5):suppl 64I-64M.
3
The use and disclosure of protected health information for research under the HIPAA privacy rule: unrealized patient autonomy and burdensome government regulation.根据《健康保险流通与责任法案》(HIPAA)隐私规则,受保护健康信息在研究中的使用与披露:未实现的患者自主权与繁重的政府监管。
S D Law Rev. 2004;49(3):447-502.
4
Health information privacy.健康信息隐私。
Cornell Law Rev. 1995 Mar;80(3):451-528.
5
Planned Parenthood of Southern Arizona v. Lawall.亚利桑那州南部计划生育协会诉劳尔案
Wests Fed Rep. 2002;307:783-94.
6
Practice brief. Patient anonymity (updated).实践简报。患者匿名性(更新版)。
J AHIMA. 2001 May;72(5):suppl 64O-64R.
7
Legal and ethical considerations in processing patient-identifiable data without patient consent: lessons learnt from developing a disease register.在未经患者同意的情况下处理可识别患者身份的数据时的法律和伦理考量:从建立疾病登记册中汲取的经验教训
J Med Ethics. 2007 May;33(5):302-7. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.016907.
8
Medical privacy and research.医疗隐私与研究
J Legal Stud. 2001 Jun;30(2):687-701. doi: 10.1086/342031.
9
The public health information infrastructure. A national review of the law on health information privacy.公共卫生信息基础设施。关于健康信息隐私的法律的全国性审查。
JAMA. 1996 Jun 26;275(24):1921-7.
10
Privacy and the economics of personal health care information.隐私与个人医疗保健信息经济学
Tex Law Rev. 1997 Nov;76(1):1-75.

引用本文的文献

1
Population attitudes towards research use of health care registries: a population-based survey in Finland.芬兰民众对医疗保健登记系统研究用途的态度:一项基于人群的调查
BMC Med Ethics. 2015 Jul 17;16:48. doi: 10.1186/s12910-015-0040-x.
2
Health Information Economy: Literature Review.健康信息经济:文献综述
Glob J Health Sci. 2015 Apr 19;7(6):250-7. doi: 10.5539/gjhs.v7n6p250.
3
The risks of absolute medical confidentiality.绝对医学保密的风险。

本文引用的文献

1
Planned Parenthood of Central Missouri v. Danforth. 1 Jul 1976.
U S Rep U S Supreme Court. 1976;428:52-105.
2
Whalen v. Roe. 22 Feb 1977.惠伦诉罗案。1977年2月22日。
U S Rep U S Supreme Court. 1977;429:589-609.
3
Doe v. Borough of Barrington.
Fed Suppl. 1990 Jan 29;729:376-91.
4
Woods v. White.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Mar;19(1):107-22. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9283-1. Epub 2011 May 25.
4
A model for expanded public health reporting in the context of HIPAA.HIPAA 环境下扩大公共卫生报告的模型。
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008 Sep-Oct;15(5):569-74. doi: 10.1197/jamia.M2207. Epub 2008 Jun 25.
5
Ethical issues in epidemiologic research and public health practice.流行病学研究与公共卫生实践中的伦理问题。
Emerg Themes Epidemiol. 2006 Oct 3;3:16. doi: 10.1186/1742-7622-3-16.
6
SARS in Singapore: surveillance strategies in a globalising city.新加坡的非典疫情:全球化城市中的监测策略
Health Policy. 2005 Jun;72(3):279-91. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2004.11.004. Epub 2004 Dec 7.
7
The quality case for information technology in healthcare.医疗保健领域信息技术的质量案例。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2002 Oct 23;2:7. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-2-7.
Fed Suppl. 1988 Jul 27;689:874-7.
5
National health information privacy: regulations under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.国家健康信息隐私:《健康保险流通与责任法案》下的规定
JAMA. 2001 Jun 20;285(23):3015-21. doi: 10.1001/jama.285.23.3015.
6
The Americans with Disabilities Act and the corpus of anti-discrimination law: a force for change in the future of public health regulation.《美国残疾人法案》与反歧视法律体系:公共卫生监管未来变革的一股力量。
Health Matrix Clevel. 1993 Spring;3(1):89-126.
7
Health services research: public benefits, personal privacy, and proprietary interests.卫生服务研究:公共利益、个人隐私与产权利益
Ann Intern Med. 1998 Nov 15;129(10):833-5. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-129-10-199811150-00017.
8
The threat to medical-records research.对医疗记录研究的威胁。
N Engl J Med. 1997 Nov 13;337(20):1466-70. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199711133372012.
9
A decision analysis of alternative treatment strategies for clinically localized prostate cancer. Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team.临床局限性前列腺癌替代治疗策略的决策分析。前列腺患者预后研究团队。
JAMA. 1993 May 26;269(20):2650-8.
10
An assessment of radical prostatectomy. Time trends, geographic variation, and outcomes. The Prostate Patient Outcomes Research Team.根治性前列腺切除术评估。时间趋势、地理差异及结果。前列腺患者结局研究团队。
JAMA. 1993 May 26;269(20):2633-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.269.20.2633.