• 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

相似文献

1
Research Participant Views regarding Qualitative Data Sharing.研究参与者对定性数据共享的看法。
Ethics Hum Res. 2020 Mar;42(2):13-27. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500044.
2
Barriers and facilitators to qualitative data sharing in the United States: A survey of qualitative researchers.美国定性数据共享的障碍和促进因素:定性研究人员的调查。
PLoS One. 2021 Dec 31;16(12):e0261719. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261719. eCollection 2021.
3
Patient Perspectives on Sharing Anonymized Personal Health Data Using a Digital System for Dynamic Consent and Research Feedback: A Qualitative Study.患者对使用数字系统进行动态同意和研究反馈来共享匿名个人健康数据的看法:一项定性研究
J Med Internet Res. 2016 Apr 15;18(4):e66. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5011.
4
First Do No Harm: Ethical Concerns of Health Researchers That Discourage the Sharing of Results With Research Participants.首先,勿施伤害:健康研究人员在与研究参与者分享研究结果方面存在的伦理问题。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2020 Apr-Jun;11(2):104-113. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2020.1737980. Epub 2020 Mar 12.
5
A one-size-fits-all approach to data-sharing will not suffice in lifecourse research: a grounded theory study of data-sharing from the perspective of participants in a 50-year-old lifecourse study about health and development.一刀切的数据共享方法在生命历程研究中是不够的:一项基于 50 年健康与发展生命历程研究参与者视角的数据共享的扎根理论研究。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2023 May 16;23(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12874-023-01940-6.
6
Ethical issues in the reuse of qualitative data: perspectives from literature, practice, and participants.定性数据再利用中的伦理问题:来自文献、实践和参与者的观点
Qual Health Res. 2014 Jan;24(1):102-13. doi: 10.1177/1049732313518373. Epub 2013 Dec 27.
7
Sweat, Skepticism, and Uncharted Territory: A Qualitative Study of Opinions on Data Sharing Among Public Health Researchers and Research Participants in Mumbai, India.汗水、怀疑与未知领域:对印度孟买公共卫生研究人员及研究参与者关于数据共享观点的定性研究
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2015 Jul;10(3):239-50. doi: 10.1177/1556264615592383.
8
Trust, confidentiality, and the acceptability of sharing HIV-related patient data: lessons learned from a mixed methods study about Health Information Exchanges.信任、保密性和共享 HIV 相关患者数据的可接受性:来自健康信息交换混合方法研究的经验教训。
Implement Sci. 2012 Apr 19;7:34. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-7-34.
9
Health researchers' experiences, perceptions and barriers related to sharing study results with participants.健康研究人员在与参与者分享研究结果方面的经验、看法和障碍。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Mar 4;17(1):25. doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0422-5.
10
What Does Anonymization Mean? DataSHIELD and the Need for Consensus on Anonymization Terminology.匿名化是什么意思?DataSHIELD与匿名化术语达成共识的必要性。
Biopreserv Biobank. 2016 Jun;14(3):224-30. doi: 10.1089/bio.2015.0119. Epub 2016 May 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Ethical implications of neurotechnology in industry-academia partnerships: Insights from patient and research participant interviews.神经技术在产学研合作中的伦理意义:来自患者和研究参与者访谈的见解
PLoS One. 2025 Sep 2;20(9):e0330367. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0330367. eCollection 2025.
2
Good, bad, different or something else? A scoping review of the convictions, conventions and developments around quality in qualitative research.好、坏、不同还是其他?定性研究中质量相关的信念、惯例及发展的范围综述
R Soc Open Sci. 2025 Jun 25;12(6):242001. doi: 10.1098/rsos.242001. eCollection 2025 Jun.
3
AccessShare: Co-designing Data Access and Sharing with Blind People.AccessShare:与盲人共同设计数据访问与共享
ASSETS. 2024;4:1-16. doi: 10.1145/3663548.3675612.
4
Dataset for a qualitative interview study exploring the barriers and facilitators to using and recommending aspirin for cancer prevention.一项定性访谈研究的数据集,该研究探讨了使用和推荐阿司匹林进行癌症预防的障碍与促进因素。
Health Psychol Behav Med. 2025 Feb 13;13(1):2463916. doi: 10.1080/21642850.2025.2463916. eCollection 2025.
5
Contributing to Accessibility Datasets: Reflections on Sharing Study Data by Blind People.为无障碍数据集做出贡献:视障人士分享研究数据的思考
Proc SIGCHI Conf Hum Factor Comput Syst. 2023 Apr;2023:827. doi: 10.1145/3544548.3581337. Epub 2023 Apr 19.
6
A dataset without a code book: ethnography and open science.一个没有编码手册的数据集:民族志与开放科学。
Front Sociol. 2024 Mar 1;9:1308029. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2024.1308029. eCollection 2024.
7
A Content Analysis of 100 Qualitative Health Research Articles to Examine Researcher-Participant Relationships and Implications for Data Sharing.对100篇定性健康研究文章进行内容分析,以审视研究者与参与者的关系及对数据共享的启示。
Int J Qual Methods. 2022 Jan-Dec;21. doi: 10.1177/16094069221105074. Epub 2022 May 31.
8
Exchanging words: Engaging the challenges of sharing qualitative research data.交流观点:应对分享定性研究数据的挑战
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Oct 24;120(43):e2206981120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2206981120. Epub 2023 Oct 13.
9
Patient perspectives on data sharing regarding implementing and using artificial intelligence in general practice - a qualitative study.患者对在全科医疗中实施和使用人工智能的数据共享的看法——一项定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Apr 4;23(1):335. doi: 10.1186/s12913-023-09324-8.
10
Public attitudes towards sharing loyalty card data for academic health research: a qualitative study.公众对学术健康研究共享会员卡数据的态度:一项定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2022 Jun 7;23(1):58. doi: 10.1186/s12910-022-00795-8.

本文引用的文献

1
Are we ready to share qualitative research data? Knowledge and preparedness among qualitative researchers, IRB Members, and data repository curators.我们准备好分享定性研究数据了吗?定性研究人员、机构审查委员会成员和数据存储库管理员的知识与准备情况。
IASSIST Q. 2020 Jan 8;43(4). doi: 10.29173/iq952.
2
Motivations for data sharing-views of research participants from four European countries: A DIRECT study.数据共享动机 - 来自四个欧洲国家的研究参与者观点:DIRECT 研究。
Eur J Hum Genet. 2019 May;27(5):721-729. doi: 10.1038/s41431-019-0344-2. Epub 2019 Jan 30.
3
Is It Time to Share Qualitative Research Data?是时候分享定性研究数据了吗?
Qual Psychol. 2018 Nov;5(3):380-393. doi: 10.1037/qup0000076. Epub 2017 Mar 16.
4
Sharing data for future research-engaging participants' views about data governance beyond the original project: a DIRECT Study.为未来的研究共享数据——超越原始项目的数据治理:DIRECT 研究中参与者的观点。
Genet Med. 2019 May;21(5):1131-1138. doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0299-7. Epub 2018 Sep 28.
5
Clinical Trial Participants' Views of the Risks and Benefits of Data Sharing.临床试验参与者对数据共享风险和收益的看法。
N Engl J Med. 2018 Jun 7;378(23):2202-2211. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa1713258.
6
Systematic review of participants' attitudes towards data sharing: a thematic synthesis.系统综述参与者对数据共享的态度:主题综合分析。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2018 Apr;23(2):123-133. doi: 10.1177/1355819617751555.
7
A comparison of views regarding the use of de-identified data.关于使用去识别数据的观点比较。
Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):113-118. doi: 10.1093/tbm/ibx054.
8
A paradigm for understanding trust and mistrust in medical research: The Community VOICES study.一种理解医学研究中信任与不信任的范式:社区声音研究。
AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2018 Jan-Mar;9(1):39-47. doi: 10.1080/23294515.2018.1432718. Epub 2018 Feb 16.
9
Informed Consent.知情同意书
N Engl J Med. 2017 Mar 2;376(9):856-867. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1603773.
10
Public Trust in Health Information Sharing: A Measure of System Trust.公众对健康信息共享的信任:系统信任的衡量标准。
Health Serv Res. 2018 Apr;53(2):824-845. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.12654. Epub 2017 Jan 18.

研究参与者对定性数据共享的看法。

Research Participant Views regarding Qualitative Data Sharing.

作者信息

Mozersky Jessica, Parsons Meredith, Walsh Heidi, Baldwin Kari, McIntosh Tristan, DuBois James M

机构信息

Assistant professor of medicine at the Bioethics Research Center at Washington University School of Medicine.

Senior public health research technician at the Bioethics Research Center at Washington University School of Medicine.

出版信息

Ethics Hum Res. 2020 Mar;42(2):13-27. doi: 10.1002/eahr.500044.

DOI:10.1002/eahr.500044
PMID:32233117
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7418215/
Abstract

We found no studies in the United States that explored research participants' perspectives about sharing their qualitative data. We present findings from interviews with 30 individuals who participated in sensitive qualitative studies to explore their understanding and concerns regarding qualitative data sharing. The vast majority supported sharing qualitative data so long as their data were deidentified and shared only among researchers. However, they raised concerns about confidentiality if the data were not adequately deidentified and about misuse by secondary users if data were shared beyond the research community. These concerns, though, did not deter them from participating in research. Notably, participants hoped their data would be shared and may have expected or assumed this was already happening. While many could not recollect details about data-sharing plans for studies in which they participated, they trusted researchers and institutions to appropriately handle data sharing. If individuals view data sharing as an extension or integral part of their participation in qualitative research, then researchers may have a stronger obligation to share qualitative data than previously thought. Guidelines and tools to assist researchers and institutional review board members in ethical and responsible qualitative data sharing are urgently needed.

摘要

我们在美国未找到探讨研究参与者对分享其定性数据看法的研究。我们展示了对30名参与敏感定性研究的个体进行访谈的结果,以探究他们对定性数据分享的理解和担忧。绝大多数人支持分享定性数据,只要他们的数据经过去识别处理且仅在研究人员之间分享。然而,如果数据未得到充分去识别,他们会担心保密性;如果数据在研究界之外分享,他们会担心二次使用者滥用。不过,这些担忧并未阻止他们参与研究。值得注意的是,参与者希望他们的数据能被分享,并且可能已经预期或假定这已经在发生。虽然许多人回忆不起他们参与的研究的数据分享计划的细节,但他们信任研究人员和机构能妥善处理数据分享。如果个体将数据分享视为他们参与定性研究的延伸或组成部分,那么研究人员可能比之前认为的有更强的义务分享定性数据。迫切需要协助研究人员和机构审查委员会成员进行符合伦理和负责任的定性数据分享的指导方针和工具。