Suppr超能文献

患者对未经同意使用临床数据进行研究的看法:合法,但也可接受?

Patient views on research use of clinical data without consent: Legal, but also acceptable?

机构信息

Institute of Epidemiology, Kiel University, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.

Institute of Experimental Medicine, Division of Biomedical Ethics, Kiel University, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 Jun;27(6):841-847. doi: 10.1038/s41431-019-0340-6. Epub 2019 Jan 25.

Abstract

The research exemption implemented in the new EU General Data Protection Regulation (EU-GDPR) gives member states leeway in determining whether patient consent is required for secondary data use in medical research. However, even though broad consent has become common in data-rich medical research in many EU countries, giving up consent altogether is likely to be controversial. The aim of this study was to examine whether abolishing consent for secondary data use would be acceptable to patients. A questionnaire study was conducted among 700 outpatients of a northern German university hospital to assess their attitude towards use of clinical data for scientific research without consent. There was both strong willingness to give broad consent for secondary data use (468 of 503 responders, 93.0%) and strong approval of abolishing patient consent (n = 381, 75.7%) among study participants. The willingness to give consent was moderately associated with approval of the respective stipulations by the EU-GDPR. In research settings where broad consent is widely accepted (e.g. university hospitals), abolishing consent for secondary research use of clinical data will likely be acceptable to a large majority of patients.

摘要

新的欧盟一般数据保护条例(EU-GDPR)中实施的研究豁免权赋予成员国在确定是否需要患者同意进行医疗研究中的二次数据使用方面的自由裁量权。然而,尽管在许多欧盟国家的数据丰富的医学研究中广泛同意已经变得很常见,但完全放弃同意可能会引起争议。本研究旨在探讨取消二次数据使用的同意是否能被患者接受。在德国北部一所大学医院的 700 名门诊患者中进行了一项问卷调查研究,以评估他们对在没有同意的情况下使用临床数据进行科学研究的态度。研究参与者中既有强烈的意愿(503 名应答者中有 468 名,93.0%)同意二次数据的广泛使用,也有强烈的赞成(n=381,75.7%)取消患者同意。同意的意愿与欧盟 GDPR 对各自规定的批准程度呈中度相关。在广泛接受广泛同意的研究环境中(例如,大学医院),取消对临床数据二次研究使用的同意,可能会被绝大多数患者接受。

相似文献

1
Patient views on research use of clinical data without consent: Legal, but also acceptable?
Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 Jun;27(6):841-847. doi: 10.1038/s41431-019-0340-6. Epub 2019 Jan 25.
2
Health Research, Consent and the GDPR Exemption.
Eur J Health Law. 2019 Apr 24;26(2):97-119. doi: 10.1163/15718093-12262427.
3
What GDPR and the Health Research Regulations (HRRs) mean for Ireland: "explicit consent"-a legal analysis.
Ir J Med Sci. 2021 May;190(2):515-521. doi: 10.1007/s11845-020-02331-2. Epub 2020 Jul 30.
4
Broad consent under the GDPR: an optimistic perspective on a bright future.
Life Sci Soc Policy. 2020 Jan 6;16(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s40504-019-0096-3.
6
Will the Eu Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 Inhibit Critical Care Research?
Med Law Rev. 2019 Feb 1;27(1):59-78. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwy023.
8
[The origin of informed consent].
Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2005 Oct;25(5):312-27.
10
Big Data in medical research and EU data protection law: challenges to the consent or anonymise approach.
Eur J Hum Genet. 2016 Jul;24(7):956-60. doi: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.239. Epub 2015 Nov 11.

引用本文的文献

1
Broad Consent in Healthcare Research: What Is Efficient, What Is Right?
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2025 Sep;62(3):856-857. doi: 10.1002/jmri.70000. Epub 2025 Jun 7.
3
Patients' knowledge, preferences, and perspectives about data protection and data control: an exploratory survey.
Front Pharmacol. 2024 Feb 20;14:1280173. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1280173. eCollection 2023.
4
Overcoming ethical and legal obstacles to data linkage in health research: stakeholder perspectives.
Int J Popul Data Sci. 2023 Sep 25;8(1):2151. doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v8i1.2151. eCollection 2023.
5
Population-Based Biobanking.
Genes (Basel). 2024 Jan 3;15(1):66. doi: 10.3390/genes15010066.
6
Perspectives on Data Sharing in Persons With Spinal Cord Injury.
Neurotrauma Rep. 2023 Nov 9;4(1):781-789. doi: 10.1089/neur.2023.0035. eCollection 2023.
10
Challenges and recommendations for high quality research using electronic health records.
Front Digit Health. 2022 Aug 19;4:940330. doi: 10.3389/fdgth.2022.940330. eCollection 2022.

本文引用的文献

1
Will the Eu Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 Inhibit Critical Care Research?
Med Law Rev. 2019 Feb 1;27(1):59-78. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwy023.
2
Including all voices in international data-sharing governance.
Hum Genomics. 2018 Mar 7;12(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s40246-018-0143-9.
3
Consent and the ethical duty to participate in health data research.
J Med Ethics. 2018 Jun;44(6):392-396. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104550. Epub 2018 Jan 22.
4
Acceptability of opt-out consent in a hospital patient population.
Intern Med J. 2018 Jan;48(1):84-87. doi: 10.1111/imj.13666.
5
Biobanks in the Era of Digital Medicine.
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018 May;103(5):761-762. doi: 10.1002/cpt.968. Epub 2017 Dec 29.
6
Rules for processing genetic data for research purposes in view of the new EU General Data Protection Regulation.
Eur J Hum Genet. 2018 Feb;26(2):149-156. doi: 10.1038/s41431-017-0045-7. Epub 2017 Nov 29.
7
Broad consent for health care-embedded biobanking: understanding and reasons to donate in a large patient sample.
Genet Med. 2018 Jan;20(1):76-82. doi: 10.1038/gim.2017.82. Epub 2017 Jun 22.
8
Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials - A Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.
N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 8;376(23):2277-2279. doi: 10.1056/NEJMe1705439. Epub 2017 Jun 5.
9
A qualitative study of participants' views on re-consent in a longitudinal biobank.
BMC Med Ethics. 2017 Mar 23;18(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12910-017-0182-0.
10
A Comparative Analysis of the Legal and Bioethical Frameworks Governing the Secondary Use of Data for Research Purposes.
Biopreserv Biobank. 2016 Jun;14(3):207-16. doi: 10.1089/bio.2015.0121. Epub 2016 May 18.

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验