• 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
Sharing administrative health data with private industry: A report on two citizens' juries.与私营行业共享行政健康数据:两次公民陪审团的报告。
Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1337-1348. doi: 10.1111/hex.13268. Epub 2021 May 28.
2
The use of citizens' juries in health policy decision-making: a systematic review.公民陪审团在卫生政策决策中的应用:系统评价。
Soc Sci Med. 2014 May;109:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.03.005. Epub 2014 Mar 6.
3
Investigating the Extent to Which Patients Should Control Access to Patient Records for Research: A Deliberative Process Using Citizens' Juries.调查患者在多大程度上应控制用于研究的患者记录的访问权限:使用公民陪审团的审议过程
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Mar 28;20(3):e112. doi: 10.2196/jmir.7763.
4
Do consumer voices in health-care citizens' juries matter?医疗保健公民陪审团中的消费者声音重要吗?
Health Expect. 2016 Oct;19(5):1015-22. doi: 10.1111/hex.12397. Epub 2015 Sep 28.
5
Evaluating the use of citizens' juries in food policy: a case study of food regulation.评估公民陪审团在食品政策中的使用:以食品监管为例。
BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 19;13:596. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-596.
6
A citizens' jury on regulation of McDonald's products and operations in Australia in response to a corporate health impact assessment.澳大利亚针对麦当劳产品和运营的监管开展公民陪审团活动,以回应企业对健康影响的评估。
Aust N Z J Public Health. 2018 Apr;42(2):133-139. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12769. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
7
It is time to update sun safety campaigns to recognise population diversity: Findings from two citizens' juries in Australia.是时候更新防晒宣传活动以认识到人群的多样性了:来自澳大利亚两个公民陪审团的发现。
Health Promot J Austr. 2024 Jul;35(3):609-616. doi: 10.1002/hpja.786. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
8
Citizens' juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome.规划研究重点中的公民陪审团:过程、参与度与结果
Health Expect. 2008 Sep;11(3):272-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00502.x.
9
Public attitudes towards novel reproductive technologies: a citizens' jury on mitochondrial donation.公众对新型生殖技术的态度:关于线粒体捐赠的公民陪审团。
Hum Reprod. 2019 Apr 1;34(4):751-757. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez021.
10
Assessing the impact of deliberative processes on the views of participants: is it 'in one ear and out the other'?评估审议过程对参与者观点的影响:是“一听了之”吗?
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):278-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00749.x. Epub 2012 Feb 2.

引用本文的文献

1
Health data social licence: An inclusive process to learn more about the perspectives of experienced public and patient advisors.健康数据社会许可:一个了解经验丰富的公众和患者顾问观点的包容性过程。
Int J Popul Data Sci. 2024 Apr 17;9(1):2375. doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v9i1.2375. eCollection 2024.
2
A scoping review of ethical aspects of public-private partnerships in digital health.数字健康领域公私伙伴关系伦理方面的范围综述。
NPJ Digit Med. 2025 Feb 27;8(1):129. doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-01515-3.
3
Setting Primary Health and Social Care Priorities Using a Deliberative Democratic Participatory Approach.采用协商民主参与式方法确定初级卫生和社会护理优先事项。
Health Expect. 2025 Feb;28(1):e70173. doi: 10.1111/hex.70173.
4
Patient and Public Willingness to Share Personal Health Data for Third-Party or Secondary Uses: Systematic Review.患者和公众对个人健康数据用于第三方或二次使用的意愿:系统评价。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Mar 5;26:e50421. doi: 10.2196/50421.
5
Public preference on sharing health data to inform research, health policy and clinical practice in Australia: A stated preference experiment.澳大利亚民众对分享健康数据以支持研究、卫生政策和临床实践的偏好:一项意愿调查实验。
PLoS One. 2023 Nov 16;18(11):e0290528. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0290528. eCollection 2023.
6
Patients' and Members of the Public's Wishes Regarding Transparency in the Context of Secondary Use of Health Data: Scoping Review.患者和公众对健康数据二次使用背景下透明度的期望:范围综述。
J Med Internet Res. 2023 Apr 13;25:e45002. doi: 10.2196/45002.
7
The Adoption of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care and Social Services in Australia: Findings From a Methodologically Innovative National Survey of Values and Attitudes (the AVA-AI Study).澳大利亚医疗保健和社会服务领域人工智能的采用:一项具有创新性方法的全国价值观和态度调查(AVA-AI 研究)的调查结果。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Aug 22;24(8):e37611. doi: 10.2196/37611.

本文引用的文献

1
Sharing Government Health Data With the Private Sector: Community Attitudes Survey.与私营部门共享政府卫生数据:社区态度调查。
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 1;23(10):e24200. doi: 10.2196/24200.
2
Sharing linked data sets for research: results from a deliberative public engagement event in British Columbia, Canada.共享用于研究的关联数据集:加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省一次公众参与审议活动的结果
Int J Popul Data Sci. 2019 May 7;4(1):1103. doi: 10.23889/ijpds.v4i1.1103.
3
Patients' and public views and attitudes towards the sharing of health data for research: a narrative review of the empirical evidence.患者和公众对健康数据用于研究的看法和态度:实证证据的叙述性综述。
J Med Ethics. 2022 Jan;48(1):3-13. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2019-105651. Epub 2019 Nov 12.
4
Commercial use of health data-A public "trial" by citizens' jury.健康数据的商业用途——公民陪审团进行的公开“试验”。
Learn Health Syst. 2019 Aug 18;3(4):e10200. doi: 10.1002/lrh2.10200. eCollection 2019 Oct.
5
"Giving something back": A systematic review and ethical enquiry into public views on the use of patient data for research in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.“回馈社会”:关于英国和爱尔兰共和国公众对将患者数据用于研究的看法的系统评价与伦理调查
Wellcome Open Res. 2019 Jan 17;3:6. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.13531.2. eCollection 2018.
6
Social licence and the general public's attitudes toward research based on linked administrative health data: a qualitative study.社会许可与公众对基于关联行政健康数据的研究的态度:一项定性研究。
CMAJ Open. 2019 Feb 3;7(1):E40-E46. doi: 10.9778/cmajo.20180099. Print 2019 Jan-Mar.
7
Elements of Trust in Digital Health Systems: Scoping Review.数字健康系统中的信任要素:范围综述
J Med Internet Res. 2018 Dec 13;20(12):e11254. doi: 10.2196/11254.
8
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.
9
Influencing health policy through public deliberation: Lessons learned from two decades of Citizens'/community juries.通过公众审议影响卫生政策:从二十年公民/社区陪审团中汲取的经验教训。
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Apr;179:166-171. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.003. Epub 2017 Mar 2.
10
Moving from trust to trustworthiness: Experiences of public engagement in the Scottish Health Informatics Programme.从信任到值得信赖:苏格兰健康信息学项目中的公众参与经验。
Sci Public Policy. 2016 Oct;43(5):713-723. doi: 10.1093/scipol/scv075. Epub 2016 May 11.

与私营行业共享行政健康数据:两次公民陪审团的报告。

Sharing administrative health data with private industry: A report on two citizens' juries.

机构信息

Australian Centre for Health Engagement, Evidence and Values (ACHEEV), School of Health and Society, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia.

Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2021 Aug;24(4):1337-1348. doi: 10.1111/hex.13268. Epub 2021 May 28.

DOI:10.1111/hex.13268
PMID:34048624
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8369100/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is good evidence of both community support for sharing public sector administrative health data in the public interest and concern about data security, misuse and loss of control over health information, particularly if private sector organizations are the data recipients. To date, there is little research describing the perspectives of informed community members on private sector use of public health data and, particularly, on the conditions under which that use might be justified.

METHODS

Two citizens' juries were held in February 2020 in two locations close to Sydney, Australia. Jurors considered the charge: 'Under what circumstances is it permissible for governments to share health data with private industry for research and development?'

RESULTS

All jurors, bar one, in principle supported sharing government administrative health data with private industry for research and development. The support was conditional and the juries' recommendations specifying these conditions related closely to the concerns they identified in deliberation.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of the deliberative processes suggest that informed Australian citizens are willing to accept sharing their administrative health data, including with private industry, providing the intended purpose is clearly of public benefit, sharing occurs responsibly in a framework of accountability, and the data are securely held.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The design of the jury was guided by an Advisory Group including representatives from a health consumer organization. The jurors themselves were selected to be descriptively representative of their communities and with independent facilitation wrote the recommendations.

摘要

背景

社区对出于公共利益共享公共部门行政健康数据表示支持,同时也对数据安全、滥用和失去对健康信息的控制表示担忧,尤其是如果私营部门组织是数据接收者。迄今为止,很少有研究描述知情社区成员对私营部门使用公共卫生数据的看法,尤其是在什么情况下可以合理使用这些数据。

方法

2020 年 2 月,在澳大利亚悉尼附近的两个地点举行了两次公民陪审团。陪审员审议的指控是:“在什么情况下,政府允许将健康数据与私营企业共享用于研究和开发?”

结果

除了一名陪审员外,所有陪审员原则上都支持政府将行政健康数据与私营企业共享用于研究和开发。这种支持是有条件的,陪审团的建议具体规定了这些条件,这些条件与他们在审议中确定的关切密切相关。

结论

审议过程的结果表明,澳大利亚知情公民愿意接受共享他们的行政健康数据,包括与私营企业共享,前提是预期目的明确是为了公共利益,在问责制框架内负责任地共享,并且数据安全保存。

患者和公众的贡献

陪审团的设计由一个包括卫生消费者组织代表在内的咨询小组指导。陪审员是根据社区的描述性代表性选择的,他们在独立的主持下撰写了建议。