“没有什么是真正安全的”:一项关于为研究目的匿名和共享健康数据的过程的焦点小组研究。

'Nothing is really safe': a focus group study on the processes of anonymizing and sharing of health data for research purposes.

机构信息

INNOGEN, ESRC Centre for Social and Economic Research on Innovation in Genomics, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

出版信息

J Eval Clin Pract. 2011 Dec;17(6):1140-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01488.x. Epub 2010 Jul 13.

Abstract

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The availability of anonymized data is a keystone of medical research, yet little is known about lay views towards the process of anonymization or on the way that anonymized medical data are transferred to researchers.

METHODS

During May and June 2009, as part of a wider consultation on methods for releasing data to researchers, three focus groups (n = 19) were conducted exploring lay attitudes towards the traditional 'warehouse' model commonly used in medical research for delivering anonymized National Health Service (NHS) data to researchers. The focus groups explored different processes such as the copying of data, use of programmers for linkage and anonymization, the transfer of data and governance.

RESULTS

The recognition of the positive aspects of medical research and desire to support it formed the context for discussions. Nonetheless, individuals varied in their attitudes to the use of anonymized data extracts for research from their health records (without consent); although some appeared positive wanted to be asked to consent for this use. Furthermore, participants were acutely aware of security breaches of NHS information nevertheless, they continued to display a high level of trust in NHS staff. Participants were concerned about the practicalities of the warehouse model and relied on their own life experiences to make sense of the model (using analogies with 'banks' or 'libraries'). The general attitude towards the processes underlying the warehouse model might best be captured by the term 'ambivalence'.

CONCLUSIONS

This research (1) offers unique insights into views of anonymization of health data extracts, how it is undertaken and data are transferred and (2) adds to an increasing body of work that demonstrates that a minority of individuals are concerned about consent, even when data are anonymized although (3) those concerned about anonymization do not necessarily seek resolution through gaining consent.

摘要

背景与目的

匿名数据的可用性是医学研究的基石,但人们对匿名化过程的看法以及匿名医疗数据如何传输给研究人员知之甚少。

方法

在 2009 年 5 月和 6 月期间,作为向研究人员发布数据方法的更广泛咨询的一部分,进行了三次焦点小组(n=19),探讨了普通民众对常用于向研究人员提供匿名国民保健服务(NHS)数据的传统“仓库”模型的态度。焦点小组探讨了不同的过程,如数据复制、使用程序员进行链接和匿名化、数据传输和治理。

结果

对医学研究的积极方面的认识和支持的愿望构成了讨论的背景。尽管如此,个人对使用来自他们健康记录的匿名数据提取进行研究(未经同意)的态度有所不同;尽管有些人看起来是积极的,但希望被要求同意这种使用。此外,参与者敏锐地意识到 NHS 信息的安全漏洞,但他们仍然对 NHS 工作人员保持高度信任。参与者对仓库模型的实用性表示关注,并依靠自己的生活经验来理解该模型(使用与“银行”或“图书馆”的类比)。仓库模型背后的过程的总体态度最好用“矛盾心理”来描述。

结论

这项研究(1)提供了对健康数据提取的匿名化、如何进行匿名化以及数据传输的独特见解,(2)增加了越来越多的工作,表明少数人担心同意,即使数据是匿名的,尽管(3)那些对匿名化感到担忧的人不一定通过获得同意来寻求解决。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索