Willison Donald J, Steeves Valerie, Charles Cathy, Schwartz Lisa, Ranford Jennifer, Agarwal Gina, Cheng Ji, Thabane Lehana
Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
BMC Med Ethics. 2009 Jul 24;10:10. doi: 10.1186/1472-6939-10-10.
Stigma refers to a distinguishing personal trait that is perceived as or actually is physically, socially, or psychologically disadvantageous. Little is known about the opinion of those who have more or less stigmatizing health conditions regarding the need for consent for use of their personal information for health research.
We surveyed the opinions of people 18 years and older with seven health conditions. Participants were drawn from: physicians' offices and clinics in southern Ontario; and from a cross-Canada marketing panel of individuals with the target health conditions. For each of five research scenarios presented, respondents chose one of five consent choices: (1) no need for me to know; (2) notice with opt-out; (3) broad opt-in; (4) project-specific permission; and (5) this information should not be used. Consent choices were regressed onto: demographics; health condition; and attitude measures of privacy, disclosure concern, and the benefits of health research. We conducted focus groups to discuss possible reasons for observed consent choices.
We observed substantial variation in the control that people wish to have over use of their personal information for research. However, consent choice profiles were similar across health conditions, possibly due to sampling bias. Research involving profit or requiring linkage of health information with income, education, or occupation were associated with more restrictive consent choices. People were more willing to link their health information with biological samples than with information about their income, occupation, or education.
The heterogeneity in consent choices suggests individuals should be offered some choice in use of their information for different types of health research, even if limited to selectively opting-out. Some of the implementation challenges could be designed into the interoperable electronic health record. However, many questions remain, including how best to capture the opinions of those who are more privacy sensitive.
污名是指一种独特的个人特征,被认为或实际上在身体、社会或心理方面具有不利影响。对于患有或多或少带有污名化健康状况的人对于在健康研究中使用其个人信息是否需要征得同意的看法,我们知之甚少。
我们调查了18岁及以上患有七种健康状况的人群的意见。参与者来自:安大略省南部的医生办公室和诊所;以及一个涵盖加拿大全国的患有目标健康状况的个人营销小组。对于所呈现的五个研究场景中的每一个,受访者从五个同意选项中选择一个:(1)无需我知晓;(2)通知并可选择退出;(3)广泛选择加入;(4)针对特定项目的许可;(5)此信息不应被使用。将同意选项与以下因素进行回归分析:人口统计学特征;健康状况;以及隐私、披露担忧和健康研究益处的态度测量指标。我们进行了焦点小组讨论,以探讨观察到的同意选项背后可能的原因。
我们观察到人们希望对其个人信息用于研究的控制权存在很大差异。然而,不同健康状况下的同意选项概况相似,这可能是由于抽样偏差所致。涉及盈利或要求将健康信息与收入、教育或职业相联系的研究,其同意选项更为严格。人们更愿意将其健康信息与生物样本相联系,而不是与关于他们收入、职业或教育的信息相联系。
同意选项的异质性表明,即使仅限于有选择地选择退出,也应该为个人在将其信息用于不同类型的健康研究方面提供一些选择。一些实施挑战可以设计到可互操作的电子健康记录中。然而,许多问题仍然存在,包括如何最好地了解那些对隐私更为敏感的人的意见。