• 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

在未获得知情同意的情况下使用常规收集的可识别健康信息进行的低风险研究:与患者信息咨询小组的接触

Low risk research using routinely collected identifiable health information without informed consent: encounters with the Patient Information Advisory Group.

作者信息

Metcalfe C, Martin R M, Noble S, Lane J A, Hamdy F C, Neal D E, Donovan J L

机构信息

Department of Social Medicine, Bristol University, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

J Med Ethics. 2008 Jan;34(1):37-40. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019661.

DOI:10.1136/jme.2006.019661
PMID:18156520
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2762744/
Abstract

Current UK legislation is impacting upon the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of medical record-based research aimed at benefiting the NHS and the public heath. Whereas previous commentators have focused on the Data Protection Act 1998, the Health and Social Care Act 2001 is the key legislation for public health researchers wishing to access medical records without written consent. The Act requires researchers to apply to the Patient Information Advisory Group (PIAG) for permission to access medical records without written permission. We present a case study of the work required to obtain the necessary permissions from PIAG in order to conduct a large scale public health research project. In our experience it took eight months to receive permission to access basic identifying information on individuals registered at general practices, and a decision on whether we could access clinical information in medical records without consent took 18 months. Such delays pose near insurmountable difficulties to grant funded research, and in our case 560,000pound of public and charitable money was spent on research staff while a large part of their work was prohibited until the third year of a three year grant. We conclude by arguing that many of the current problems could be avoided by returning PIAG's responsibilities to research ethics committees, and by allowing "opt-out" consent for many public health research projects.

摘要

英国现行立法正在影响旨在造福国民健康服务体系(NHS)和公众健康的基于病历的研究的可行性和成本效益。尽管此前的评论员将重点放在了1998年的《数据保护法》上,但对于希望在未经书面同意的情况下获取病历的公共卫生研究人员来说,2001年的《健康与社会关怀法》才是关键立法。该法案要求研究人员向患者信息咨询小组(PIAG)申请在未经书面许可的情况下获取病历的许可。我们呈现了一个案例研究,内容是为了开展一个大规模公共卫生研究项目而从PIAG获得必要许可所需开展的工作。根据我们的经验,花了八个月才获得访问在全科诊所登记的个人基本身份信息的许可,而关于我们是否可以在未经同意的情况下访问病历中的临床信息的决定则花了18个月。这样的延迟给资助研究带来了几乎无法克服的困难,在我们的案例中,在研究人员的大部分工作在三年资助期的第三年之前被禁止的情况下,仍花费了56万英镑的公共和慈善资金用于研究人员。我们最后指出,将PIAG的职责归还给研究伦理委员会,并允许许多公共卫生研究项目采用“退出”同意的方式,可以避免当前的许多问题。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dcb7/2762744/01162470072e/ukmss-27933-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dcb7/2762744/01162470072e/ukmss-27933-f0001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/dcb7/2762744/01162470072e/ukmss-27933-f0001.jpg

相似文献

1
Low risk research using routinely collected identifiable health information without informed consent: encounters with the Patient Information Advisory Group.在未获得知情同意的情况下使用常规收集的可识别健康信息进行的低风险研究:与患者信息咨询小组的接触
J Med Ethics. 2008 Jan;34(1):37-40. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019661.
2
The Patient Information Advisory Group and the use of patient-identifiable data.患者信息咨询小组与可识别患者的数据的使用。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Jul;8 Suppl 1:S1:8-11. doi: 10.1258/135581903766468819.
3
Privacy and the secondary use of data in health research in Scotland.苏格兰健康研究中的隐私与数据二次使用
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Jul;8 Suppl 1:S1:12-6. doi: 10.1258/135581903766468828.
4
Issues of patient consent: a study of paediatric high-dependency care.患者同意问题:一项关于儿科重症监护的研究。
Br J Nurs. 2005;14(9):519-23. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2005.14.9.18079.
5
HIPAA impacting patient medical information.《健康保险流通与责任法案》影响患者医疗信息。
Tenn Med. 2009 May;102(5):41-2.
6
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.
7
Freedom of Information Act: scalpel or just a sharp knife?《信息自由法》:手术刀还是仅仅一把利刃?
J Med Ethics. 2017 Jan;43(1):60-62. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2016-103609. Epub 2016 Oct 18.
8
Data protection rights and preserving confidentiality.数据保护权与保密
Br J Nurs. 2005;14(17):936-7. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2005.14.17.19760.
9
Learning from experience: privacy and the secondary use of data in health research.从经验中学习:健康研究中的隐私与数据二次使用
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2003 Jul;8 Suppl 1:S1:2-7. doi: 10.1258/135581903766468800.
10
Disclosure of patient records.患者记录的披露。
Emerg Nurse. 2007 Oct;15(6):18-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Considerations for an integrated population health databank in Africa: lessons from global best practices.非洲综合人口健康数据库的考量:全球最佳实践的经验教训
Wellcome Open Res. 2021 Aug 23;6:214. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.17000.1. eCollection 2021.
2
Active monitoring, radical prostatectomy and radical radiotherapy in PSA-detected clinically localised prostate cancer: the ProtecT three-arm RCT.主动监测、根治性前列腺切除术和根治性放疗在 PSA 检测到的局限性前列腺癌中的应用:ProtecT 三臂 RCT。
Health Technol Assess. 2020 Aug;24(37):1-176. doi: 10.3310/hta24370.
3
"Let's get the best quality research we can": public awareness and acceptance of consent to use existing data in health research: a systematic review and qualitative study.

本文引用的文献

1
Consent for the use of personal medical data in research.同意在研究中使用个人医疗数据。
BMJ. 2006 Jul 29;333(7561):255-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.333.7561.255.
2
National survey of British public's views on use of identifiable medical data by the National Cancer Registry.英国公众对国家癌症登记处使用可识别医疗数据看法的全国性调查。
BMJ. 2006 May 6;332(7549):1068-72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38805.473738.7C. Epub 2006 Apr 28.
3
Consent, confidentiality, and the Data Protection Act.同意、保密与《数据保护法》。
“让我们获取最好的研究质量”:公众对在健康研究中使用现有数据的知情同意的认识和接受程度:系统评价和定性研究。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Jun 4;13:72. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-72.
4
Procedure versus process: ethical paradigms and the conduct of qualitative research.程序与过程:伦理范式与定性研究的实施。
BMC Med Ethics. 2012 Sep 27;13:25. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-13-25.
5
Inclusion of residual tissue in biobanks: opt-in or opt-out?生物库中留存组织的纳入:选择加入还是选择退出?
PLoS Biol. 2012;10(8):e1001373. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001373. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
6
[Research and protection of personal data in Primary Care].基层医疗中个人数据的研究与保护
Aten Primaria. 2012 Mar;44(3):172-7. doi: 10.1016/j.aprim.2011.02.009. Epub 2011 Jul 29.
7
A randomised controlled trial to compare opt-in and opt-out parental consent for childhood vaccine safety surveillance using data linkage: study protocol.一项使用数据链接比较选择加入和选择退出父母同意进行儿童疫苗安全性监测的随机对照试验:研究方案。
Trials. 2011 Jan 4;12:1. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-1.
8
Mean sojourn time, overdiagnosis, and reduction in advanced stage prostate cancer due to screening with PSA: implications of sojourn time on screening.前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)筛查导致的平均停留时间、过度诊断及晚期前列腺癌减少:停留时间对筛查的影响
Br J Cancer. 2009 Apr 7;100(7):1198-204. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604973. Epub 2009 Mar 17.
9
Should European Independent Ethics Committees be dismantled?欧洲独立伦理委员会应该被撤销吗?
Intensive Care Med. 2009 Apr;35(4):579-81. doi: 10.1007/s00134-009-1435-2. Epub 2009 Feb 12.
BMJ. 2006 Jan 21;332(7534):165-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7534.165.
4
Using personal health information in medical research.在医学研究中使用个人健康信息。
BMJ. 2006 Jan 21;332(7534):130-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.332.7534.130.
5
Bias from requiring explicit consent from all participants in observational research: prospective, population based study.观察性研究中要求所有参与者明确同意所产生的偏倚:基于人群的前瞻性研究。
BMJ. 2005 Oct 22;331(7522):942. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38624.397569.68. Epub 2005 Oct 13.
6
Recruiting patients to medical research: double blind randomised trial of "opt-in" versus "opt-out" strategies.招募患者参与医学研究:“选择加入”与“选择退出”策略的双盲随机试验。
BMJ. 2005 Oct 22;331(7522):940. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38583.625613.AE. Epub 2005 Sep 12.
7
Legal aspects of records based medical research.基于记录的医学研究的法律问题。
Arch Dis Child. 2004 Oct;89(10):899-901. doi: 10.1136/adc.2003.045666.
8
The use of personal data from medical records and biological materials: ethical perspectives and the basis for legal restrictions in health research.医疗记录和生物材料中个人数据的使用:伦理视角及健康研究中法律限制的依据
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Nov;59(9):1975-84. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.02.032.
9
Data protection, informed consent, and research.数据保护、知情同意与研究
BMJ. 2004 May 1;328(7447):1029-30. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7447.1029.
10
Features and preliminary results of the Dutch centre of the ERSPC (Rotterdam, the Netherlands).欧洲前列腺癌筛查研究(ERSPC)荷兰中心(荷兰鹿特丹)的特点及初步结果。
BJU Int. 2003 Dec;92 Suppl 2:48-54. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2003.04390.x.