文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
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
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
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 @ 2025

公众对用于研究目的的健康数据共享和关联的反应:定性研究的系统评价与主题综合

Public responses to the sharing and linkage of health data for research purposes: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

作者信息

Aitken Mhairi, de St Jorre Jenna, Pagliari Claudia, Jepson Ruth, Cunningham-Burley Sarah

机构信息

Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Medical School, Teviot Place, Edinburgh, EH8 9AG, UK.

The Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research (SCPHRP), 20 West Richmond Street, Edinburgh, EH8 9DX, UK.

出版信息

BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Nov 10;17(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s12910-016-0153-x.


DOI:10.1186/s12910-016-0153-x
PMID:27832780
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5103425/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The past 10 years have witnessed a significant growth in sharing of health data for secondary uses. Alongside this there has been growing interest in the public acceptability of data sharing and data linkage practices. Public acceptance is recognised as crucial for ensuring the legitimacy of current practices and systems of governance. Given the growing international interest in this area this systematic review and thematic synthesis represents a timely review of current evidence. It highlights the key factors influencing public responses as well as important areas for further research. METHODS: This paper reports a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies examining public attitudes towards the sharing or linkage of health data for research purposes. Twenty-five studies were included in the review. The included studies were conducted primarily in the UK and North America, with one study set in Japan, another in Sweden and one in multiple countries. The included studies were conducted between 1999 and 2013 (eight studies selected for inclusion did not report data collection dates). The qualitative methods represented in the studies included focus groups, interviews, deliberative events, dialogue workshops and asynchronous online interviews. RESULTS: Key themes identified across the corpus of studies related to the conditions necessary for public support/acceptability, areas of public concern and implications for future research. The results identify a growing body of evidence pointing towards widespread general-though conditional-support for data linkage and data sharing for research purposes. Whilst a variety of concerns were raised (e.g. relating to confidentiality, individuals' control over their data, uses and abuses of data and potential harms arising) in cases where participants perceived there to be actual or potential public benefits from research and had trust in the individuals or organisations conducting and/or overseeing data linkage/sharing, they were generally supportive. The studies also find current low levels of awareness about existing practices and uses of data. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst the results indicate widespread (conditional) public support for data sharing and linkage for research purposes, a range of concerns exist. In order to ensure public support for future research uses of data greater awareness raising combined with opportunities for public engagement and deliberation are needed. This will be essential for ensuring the legitimacy of future health informatics research and avoiding further public controversy.

摘要

背景:在过去十年中,用于二次利用的健康数据共享有了显著增长。与此同时,人们对数据共享和数据链接实践的公众可接受性的兴趣也与日俱增。公众接受度被认为对于确保当前实践和治理体系的合法性至关重要。鉴于国际上对这一领域的兴趣日益浓厚,本系统综述和主题综合分析及时回顾了当前的证据。它突出了影响公众反应的关键因素以及进一步研究的重要领域。 方法:本文报告了一项对定性研究的系统综述和主题综合分析,这些研究考察了公众对出于研究目的共享或链接健康数据的态度。该综述纳入了25项研究。纳入的研究主要在英国和北美进行,一项研究在日本开展,另一项在瑞典,还有一项在多个国家进行。纳入的研究在1999年至2013年期间开展(八项入选研究未报告数据收集日期)。研究中所采用的定性方法包括焦点小组、访谈、审议活动、对话研讨会和异步在线访谈。 结果:在整个研究语料库中确定的关键主题涉及公众支持/接受所需的条件、公众关注的领域以及对未来研究的影响。结果表明,越来越多的证据表明,对于出于研究目的的数据链接和数据共享,公众普遍(尽管有条件)给予支持。虽然提出了各种担忧(例如与保密性、个人对其数据的控制、数据的使用和滥用以及可能产生的潜在危害有关),但在参与者认为研究有实际或潜在的公共利益,并且对进行和/或监督数据链接/共享的个人或组织有信任的情况下,他们通常是支持的。研究还发现,目前公众对现有数据实践和用途的认识水平较低。 结论:虽然结果表明公众普遍(有条件)支持出于研究目的的数据共享和链接,但仍存在一系列担忧。为了确保公众对未来数据研究用途的支持,需要提高公众意识,并为公众参与和审议提供机会。这对于确保未来健康信息学研究的合法性以及避免进一步的公众争议至关重要。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1051/5103425/36bbc958410c/12910_2016_153_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1051/5103425/36bbc958410c/12910_2016_153_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1051/5103425/36bbc958410c/12910_2016_153_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Public responses to the sharing and linkage of health data for research purposes: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies.

BMC Med Ethics. 2016-11-10

[2]
Participation in environmental enhancement and conservation activities for health and well-being in adults: a review of quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-5-21

[3]
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-10-4

[4]
Health professionals' experience of teamwork education in acute hospital settings: a systematic review of qualitative literature.

JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016-4

[5]
The use of Open Dialogue in Trauma Informed Care services for mental health consumers and their family networks: A scoping review.

J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2024-8

[6]
Home treatment for mental health problems: a systematic review.

Health Technol Assess. 2001

[7]
The measurement and monitoring of surgical adverse events.

Health Technol Assess. 2001

[8]
How to Implement Digital Clinical Consultations in UK Maternity Care: the ARM@DA Realist Review.

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025-5-21

[9]
How lived experiences of illness trajectories, burdens of treatment, and social inequalities shape service user and caregiver participation in health and social care: a theory-informed qualitative evidence synthesis.

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025-6

[10]
Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-10-27

引用本文的文献

[1]
Ethical implications of neurotechnology in industry-academia partnerships: Insights from patient and research participant interviews.

PLoS One. 2025-9-2

[2]
Immune profiling in oncology: bridging the gap between technology and treatment.

Med Oncol. 2025-8-26

[3]
If it wasn't for us, there would be no data: stakeholders' perspectives on patient involvement in the use of health data in Ireland.

Res Involv Engagem. 2025-7-28

[4]
Factors influencing patients' willingness to share their digital health data for primary and secondary use: A theory- and evidence-based overview of reviews.

Digit Health. 2025-6-30

[5]
Implementing health economics for pharmacogenomics research translation in Africa.

Commun Med (Lond). 2025-6-20

[6]
Contribution and legacy: a qualitative study of older people's attitudes about sharing their routinely collected health data for research purposes in New Zealand.

BMC Med Ethics. 2025-5-30

[7]
Determining a role for Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement (PPIE) in genomic data governance for cancer care.

Eur J Hum Genet. 2025-5-23

[8]
Patients' Perceptions of Artificial Intelligence Acceptance, Challenges, and Use in Medical Care: Qualitative Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2025-5-15

[9]
Transparency in the existence, use, and output of a mental health data resource: a descriptive paper from the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre (BRC) Clinical Record Interactive Search (CRIS) Platform.

Int J Popul Data Sci. 2025-4-10

[10]
Sharing health data for research purposes: results of a population survey in Germany.

BMC Health Serv Res. 2025-5-14

本文引用的文献

[1]
Moving from trust to trustworthiness: Experiences of public engagement in the Scottish Health Informatics Programme.

Sci Public Policy. 2016-10

[2]
Perspectives of Australian adults about protecting the privacy of their health information in statistical databases.

Int J Med Inform. 2012-2-10

[3]
Inclusion of African Americans in genetic studies: what is the barrier?

Am J Epidemiol. 2011-6-1

[4]
Administrative record linkage as a tool for public health research.

Annu Rev Public Health. 2011

[5]
Public attitudes to the use in research of personal health information from general practitioners' records: a survey of the Irish general public.

J Med Ethics. 2010-11-11

[6]
'Nothing is really safe': a focus group study on the processes of anonymizing and sharing of health data for research purposes.

J Eval Clin Pract. 2010-7-13

[7]
A decade of data linkage in Western Australia: strategic design, applications and benefits of the WA data linkage system.

Aust Health Rev. 2008-11

[8]
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews.

BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008-7-10

[9]
Participant characteristics that influence consent for genetic research in a population-based survey: the Baltimore epidemiologic catchment area follow-up.

Community Genet. 2008

[10]
Extracting information from hospital records: what patients think about consent.

Qual Saf Health Care. 2007-12

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索